ecorest: Generic Platform for Index-Based Modeling

Abstract

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) engages in a large variety of decisions affecting ecological outcomes such as ecosystem restoration of oyster reefs, environmental flows for imperiled fishes, and bird breeding grounds impacted by dredge material management. A common approach to ecological modeling of environmental impacts and benefits is based on the quantity and quality of habitats. No standard modeling platform exists for computing outcomes from these “index” models, and users often develop ad hoc spreadsheet models. Here, we present a generic, flexible, error-checked index modeling platform applicable Nationwide, which we refer to as the “ecorest” modeling framework. Four modules compose this framework. First, model parameters are compiled as a data set and associated metadata for 349 habitat suitability models developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Second, functions are presented for conducting habitat suitability analyses for both the models described above as well as generic user-specified model parameterizations. Third, a suite of decision support tools are presented for conducting cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analyses. These three modules are all contained within an open source modeling package for the R Statistical Software Language called ecorest. This modeling platform seeks to standardize availability and application of index models within the USACE.

Author Headnotes:

• Corresponding Author: Darixa D. Hernandez-Abrams, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), Environmental Laboratory (EL), Vicksburg, M.S., darixa.d.hernandez-abrams@usace.army.mil
  
• This report provides an overview of development of an ecological modeling platform for USACE model certification. Model source code has been previously reviewed and released as the ecorest “package” by the Comprehensive R Archival Network (CRAN). This report will simultaneously undergo peer review as an ERDC Technical Report.
  
• All analyses are conducted in the (ACE-IT approved) R Statistical Software.
  
• Color schemes may seem non-traditional (i.e., non-rainbow arrays), but colors were chosen for maximum understanding by color deficient audiences. Nationwide, approximately 8% of men and 0.5% of women exhibit some form of color deficiency. In USACE, supervisors (GS-13 or higher) are ~74% male and ~26% female, which results in a 6% chance of a team member exhibiting color-blindness (1 out of 17). Among USACE decision makers, army officers (O4 or higher) are ~85% male and ~15% female, which results in a 7% chance of a team member exhibiting color-blindness (1 out of 15). Specifically, ecorest uses viridis color schemes.

1. Background

Across all business lines, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) engages in a large variety of decisions that affect a multitude of ecological outcomes (e.g., ecosystem restoration of oyster reefs, environmental flows for imperiled fishes, and bird breeding grounds impacted by dredge material management). While numerous aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial analytical tools exist, ecological models typically have not been easily accessible or in the most usable form for field practitioners and often require significant data and modeling expertise to effectively employ. However, ecological models must be used to quantify environmental impacts and benefits throughout the project life-cycle of planning, engineering, construction, operations, and maintenance.

A common approach to ecological modeling of environmental impacts and benefits is based on quantity and quality of habitat. These “index” models (Swannack et al. 2012) were originally developed for species-specific applications (e.g., slider turtles), but the general approach has also been adapted to guilds (e.g., salmonids), communities (e.g., floodplain vegetation), and ecosystem processes (e.g., the Hydrogeomorphic Method). No standard platform exists for computing outcomes from index models, and users often develop ad hoc spreadsheet models, which are highly prone to numerical errors (McKay 2009). The common quantity-quality structure of index models provides an opportunity to develop a consistent, error-checked index modeling calculator adaptable to a variety of applications across the Corps of Engineers.

Furthermore, ecological modeling often seeks to inform trade-offs between a monetary assessment of social benefits or costs (e.g., restoration investment cost or economic damages avoided) and a non-monetary assessment of environmental benefits and costs (e.g., habitat gains of restoration or impact to an imperiled taxon’s habitat). Cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analyses (CEICA) provide a useful set of techniques for comparing non-monetary and monetary costs and benefits of management actions (Robinson et al. 1995). CEICA is commonly applied in planning and designing ecosystem restoration projects and is often coupled with index models to inform management decisions.

1.1 Problem Statement

This document describes a set of computational tools for assessing ecological outcomes with index models and informing trade-offs between monetary and non-monetary outcomes. The following topics guided the scope of this analysis:

• Model Purpose: Ad hoc development of index models is leading to significant USACE investments in computational tool development, user learning, model review, and certification. This platform seeks to provide an error-checked, computationally accurate tool for assessing ecological outcomes with index models. Furthermore, the platform should also provide seamless integration of decision support tools to avoid potential errors associated with data transfer between separate ecological and decision models.
  
• Target Application: This toolkit is intended primarily for USACE ecosystem restoration planning; however, index models are also often applied for impact assessment, compensatory mitigation, and wetland regulatory issues.
  
• Target Users: The primary audience for these tools is USACE planners, biologists, and engineers involved in ecosystem restoration projects.
  
• Model Engine: This document addresses the development of computational engines for index models and decision support tools, both of which are developed as the ecorest “package” for broad distribution via the R statistical software language. The R-package may be accessed through the (ACE-IT approved) R freeware and associated user-interfaces such as RStudio. * Modular Design: All model capabilities are developed as separate databases and functions, which can be accessed independently. For instance, the toolkit is intended to provide “one stop shopping” for USACE restoration planning needs by integrating index and decision support models. However, users may also use non-index models (e.g., population demography models via popbio) to examine other ecological outcomes in the decision modules. Likewise, users could compute index model outcomes without using decision support tools.

Ultimately, the overarching objective of this model is to develop a technically sound and computationally accurate suite of tools for assessing ecosystem restoration project planning with index models, which are easily accessible for use by USACE planners, biologists, and engineers. This report describes the development of a suite of restoration modeling tools called ecorest. While developed for ecosystem restoration applications, the tools may be applied in a variety of other contexts including impact assessment and non-restoration cost-benefit analysis.

1.2. Model Development Process

Models were developed following a general ecological modeling process of conceptualization, quantification, evaluation, application, and communication (Grant and Swannack 2008). Tools were conceptualized based on common approaches to index modeling. Generic functions were then developed to quantify index model and decision support outcomes, which were “packed” for use in the R Statistical Software. Models are then evaluated relative to their numerical accuracy and usability. Finally, application and communication of models is demonstrated through a series of appendices with step-by-step instructional guides and example applications on USACE restoration studies.

Models were iteratively developed and checked. Functions were initially developed and tested by the authors and other ERDC Environmental Laboratory staff. Models were then expanded and generalized in the form of the ecorest R-package, which was subsequently reviewed and posted online via the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). All versions of the final ecorest package were then formally tested against known verified model outcomes, and example applications were developed for demonstration purposes.

This report is organized around the modeling process followed. Each section describes the technical basis of index based models along with their execution in ecorest. Report appendices provide additional information about models such as formal testing, user guides, and numerous example applications. This document is intended to provide documentation of the model’s technical details, use, and relevant information for USACE model certification (EC 1105-2-412, PB 2013-02).

2. Conceptualization

The ecorest platform synthesizes two major analytical approaches within a single numerical framework. First, index models are a common ecological modeling approach used in assessing impacts and benefits of environmental management actions. Second, cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analysis (CEICA) are decision support tools for informing decisions involving non-commensurate metrics such as non-monetary ecological outcomes and monetary costs. Finally, the ecorest modeling platform provides a computational workflow for uniting these analyses to inform ecosystem restoration decision-making. The following sections review the conceptual foundation for each of these topics separately.

2.1. Index-Based Ecological Models

Ecological models have become common tools for informing decisions related to the management of complex ecological processes. Models span the breadth of their potential ecological management applications such as seafood harvest limits, transport of nutrients into freshwaters, bioaccumulation of contaminants, management of imperiled taxa, and wetland impact assessment. In addition to diverse outcomes, ecological models often take on a variety of theoretical constructs ranging from theoretical, analytical models to statistical correlations of variables to agent-based simulations of animal movement (see Swannack et al. 2012 for a review of ecological model types). The diversity of ecological endpoints and model constructs has led to a wide array of tools applicable to ecosystem management and restoration.

Index models are a family of techniques commonly applied in planning ecosystem restoration projects. Briefly, index models quantitatively translate multiple features or processes into a relative assessment of habitat suitability for a given organism or a relative assessment of ecosystem condition (Tirpak et al. 2009, Swannack et al. 2012). More specifically, index models combine assessments of habitat or ecosystem quality and quantity into an overarching metric for assessing the relative condition of a site (e.g., a “habitat unit” or “functional capacity unit”). Quantity is commonly expressed as a metric of area such as acres or hectares; however, other metrics may be appropriate to specific applications such as river length or lake volume. Quality is then assessed by identifying key variables correlated with habitat or ecosystem condition. Each variable is then translated into a suitability index curve, which transforms dimensional quantities such as flow velocity into dimensionless values of quality (0 to 1 where 0 is unsuitable/low condition and 1 is suitable/ideal condition). Multiple suitability curves are then combined through various equational forms into an overarching assessment of habitat quality (e.g., a “habitat suitability index” or “functional capacity index”).

Index models may be derived from a variety of methods and resources. Like all models, many index model developers have emphasized that these algorithms simplify complex ecosystems, and thus, these tools should be considered adaptable hypotheses rather than mechanistic, cause-effect relationships. The value of index models lies in their utility for quantitatively comparing the relative merits of alternative management actions and testing hypotheses. The following represent the most common sources of index models applied to USACE ecosystem restoration projects:

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Models: The HSI approach quantitatively relates the potential for species presence to habitat characteristics. Species have complex relationships with their environment, and HSI models provide a simple method for characterizing the potential for habitat to support target species across a landscape. The USFWS led the development of 500+ HSI models in the 1970-1980s to support environmental management decisions nationwide (https://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/wdb/pub/hsi/hsiindex.htm). The quantitative relationships between species and habitat were generally based on a combination of literature, field studies, and expert opinion, and the reports are colloquially referred to as the “blue books” because of the blue covers binding the original publications.
  
• Hydrogeomorphic Method (HGM) of Wetland Assessment: Similarly, the HGM approach is a common technique for rapidly assessing wetland function. The HGM methodology for model development is thoroughly documented (Brinson 1993, Smith et al. 1995), and models are available for 30+ wetland types nationwide (https://wetlands.el.erdc.dren.mil/guidebooks.cfm).
  
• Literature-Based Index Models: Index models also appear within the peer-reviewed and grey literature in a variety of formats. Some of the original HSI models have been subsequently adapted to local conditions or updated as new data became available (e.g., the bluegill model by Stuber et al. 1982 was adapted by Palesh and Anderson 1990). Models also appear in the peer-reviewed literature as new data become available, such as a recent revision to oyster suitability models which expands the breadth of applicability (Swannack et al. 2014).
• Project- or Objective-Centric Index Models: Specific restoration projects may build models unique to a set of project objectives (McKay et al. 2019), which can evolve as a project proceeds from preliminary screening to detailed alternatives analysis (e.g., McKay et al. 2018ab). More recently, Carrillo et al. (2020) proposed a Toolkit for interActive Modeling (TAM), which facilitates development of index models in real-time for mediated modeling workshop settings (Herman et al. 2019).

2.2. Cost-Effectiveness and Incremental Cost Analysis (CEICA)

The USACE ecosystem restoration mission was first authorized in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 with the stated purpose “…to restore significant structure, function and dynamic processes that have been degraded” (USACE 1999, ER 1165-2-501). Given this goal, USACE programs emphasize ecological outcomes (as opposed to social or economic outcomes). Generally, ecological resources may be quantified in a variety of ways ranging from habitat suitability for a focal taxon (e.g., an endangered species) to changes in physical processes (e.g., sediment delivery from geomorphic change) to changes in biological processes (e.g., carbon uptake and storage). In other USACE business lines (e.g., navigation), costs and benefits of actions are compared in monetary terms, and the benefit-cost ratio serves as a crucial decision metric. However, outputs of restoration are typically not monetized, and a different set of methods are required to inform restoration decision-making and address the issue of “Is ecosystem restoration worth the Federal investment?” In particular, cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analyses provide techniques for comparing non-monetary ecological benefits relative to monetary costs of restoration actions (Robinson et al. 1995).

Cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analyses (CEICA) are analytical tools for assessing the relative benefits and costs of ecosystem restoration actions and informing decisions. Benefits and costs are assessed prior to these analyses using ecological models (e.g., index models) and cost engineering methods, respectively. CEICA may then be conducted at the site scale to compare alternatives at a single location (e.g., no action vs. dam removal vs. fish ladder) or at the system scale to compare relative merits of multiple sites (e.g., no sites vs. Site-A only vs. Site-B only vs. Site-A and Site-B). Within the USACE, the Institute of Water Resources has provided a toolkit for conducting CEICA, the IWR Planning Suite (http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Missions/Economics/IWR-Planning-Suite/).

Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a mechanism for examining the efficiency of alternative actions. For any given level of investment, the agency wants to identify the plan with the most return-on-investment (i.e., the most environmental benefits), and for any given level of environmental benefits, the agency wants a plan with the least cost. An “efficiency frontier” identifies all plans that efficiently provide benefits on a per cost basis (i.e., cost-effective plans). These “non-dominated” alternatives compose the Pareto-optimal frontier.

Incremental cost analysis is conducted on the set of cost-effective plans. This technique sequentially compares each plan to all higher cost plans to reveal changes in unit cost as output levels increase and eliminates plans that do not efficiently provide benefits on a per unit cost basis. Specifically, this analysis examines the slope of the cost-effectiveness frontier to isolate how the incremental unit cost ($/unit) increases as the magnitude of environmental benefit increases. Incremental cost analysis is ultimately intended to inform decision-makers about the consequences of increasing unit cost when increasing benefits (i.e., each unit becomes more expensive). Plans emerging from incremental cost analysis efficiently accomplish the objective relative to unit costs and are typically referred to as “best buys.” Importantly, all “best buys” are cost-effective, but all cost-effective plans are not best buys.

2.3. ecorest Model Workflow

Conceptual models provide a useful mechanism for many aspects of ecosystem restoration projects such as increasing understanding about a subject, identifying restoration alternatives, and facilitating dialog among team members (Fischenich 2008, USACE 2011). However,conceptual models also inform the development of quantitative ecological models and can document the general workflow of models (Grant and Swannack 2008, Swannack et al. 2012). Here, a conceptual model is presented to describe the general workflow of the ecorest computational platform. A stepwise conceptual model development process (Fischenich 2008) was used to develop the model workflow (Table 1), and Figure 1 summarizes the general flow of logic guiding the development of ecorest.

Table 1. Stepwise development of the ecorest conceptual model (following steps in Fischenich 2008).

Step	ecorest
1. State the model objectives.	To develop a technically sound and computationally accurate suite of tools for assessing ecosystem restoration project planning with index models and informing restoration decisions, which are easily accessible for use by USACE planners, biologists, and engineers.
2. Bound the system of interest.	Index models of ecological systems structured around the quantity and quality of habitat, where quality is defined by a set of independent variables and suitability index curves.
3. Identify critical model components within the system.	The model platform needs to include six basic elements: (1) a generic format for defining suitability index curves, (2) a library of existing index models developed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, (3) a computational engine for computing index model outcomes, (4) a computational engine for conducting decision support modeling, and (5) a simple, adaptable, and modular input-output structure
4. Articulate relationships among model components.	Components interact through a modular workflow in which model inputs are used to build suitability relationships, index-model functions compute habitat outputs, and decision-support functions consume those outputs to evaluate trade-offs.
5. Represent the conceptual model.	Figure 1 provides an overview of computational workflow for the ecorest modeling platform

Figure 1. Conceptual workflow of the ecorest index and decision support modeling toolkit.

3. Quantification

In the quantification step, the conceptual ecological model is converted into explicit equations, parameter definitions, and a numerical procedure for computation (Grant and Swannack 2008).This section describes the theoretical basis for ecorest, the approach used to compile the toolkit and the associated functions.

Ecorest contains three categories of datasets and analytical functions designed to support ecosystem restoration decision-making, with an emphasis on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers applications. First, a common data structure was developed for index models, data were compiled for existing habitat suitability index (HSI) models, and a Toolkit for interActive Modeling (TAM) was developed to facilitate development of new index models (Carrillo et al. 2019). Second, an engine was developed for computing index models with functions for both generic model evaluation outputs (e.g., suitability curve visualization and sensitivity analysis) and application-specific outputs (e.g., forecasts of with and without project conditions). Third, a series of functions were developed to conduct cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analyses (CEICA), which can be applied to index model outputs or any other trade-off between benefits and costs. These three topics are synthesized into a R-package (McKay, Hernandez-Abrams, and Cushway 2025) and will be the focus of this report.

R is a free, open-source language and software environment for statistical computing and graphics maintained by the R Core Team and supported by the R Foundation. R supports reproducible, script-based workflows and is extended through “packages,” which bundle functions, documentation, and (when applicable) datasets into a standardized structure that can be installed and executed consistently across operating systems.

The ecorest package page is distributed through the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN), the primary public repository for R packages. CRAN maintains repository policies and uses automated checks (including installation and “R CMD check” style testing) to evaluate package structure, documentation, dependencies, and runnable examples across platforms. Packages are routinely re-checked over time as R and dependencies change, and maintainers may be required to address issues to remain compliant while noncompliant packages may be archived. See the ecorest package page for details.

3.1. USFWS Habitat Suitability Model Data

The ecorest package includes a compiled library of USFWS HSI models implemented in a standardized digital format to improve accessibility, reduce transcription error, and support repeatable computations. The data structures presented in Section 3.1 store the curve breakpoints and coding conventions needed to reconstruct published suitability relationships, while model metadata document model details (e.g., geographic range, scientic name), intended application context, and citation information. Together, these datasets provide the inputs required for the index model calculations described in Section 3.2.

HSImodels$modelname

This list of data frames contains 349 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat suitability index (HSI) models. Each data frame contains independent variables and associated habitat suitability indices (a 0 to 1 value). Data represent break points in curves with linear extrapolation between. Categorical input variables are coded as letters. A comprehensive list of all models is included in Appendix B. Variable names often required abbreviation, and all nomenclature is also summarized in Appendix B. Table 2 provides and example of one such HSI model for barred owl model (Allen 1987). All models can be called with the corresponding model name using HSImodels$modelname (e.g., HSImodels$barredowl).

Table 2. Example of USFWS Habitat Suitability Model Data: Barred Owl (Allen 1987).

num.trees.mtoe51cm.dbh.0.4ha	num.trees.mtoe51cm.dbh.0.4ha.SIV	avg.dbh.overstory.trees.cm	avg.dbh.overstory.trees.SIV	can.cov.overstory.trees.pct	can.cov.overstory.trees.SIV
0	0.1	0	0	0	0
2	1.0	13	0	20	0
4	1.0	51	1	60	1
NA	NA	NA	NA	100	1

HSImetadata

This data frame contains metadata for 349 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat suitability index (HSI) models, such as model names, documentation, and websites for documentation among other fields. Table 3 provides a full listing of all fields contained within HSImetadata along with an example for the barred owl model (Allen 1987).

Insert a table for metadata example

3.2. Index Model Computational Engine

The index model computational engine in ecorest is implemented as a modular workflow that separates (1) representation and visualization of suitability relationships, (2) calculation of suitability indices from project inputs from USFWS models(Section 3.1) or user-specified models, (3) calculation of suitability indices into an overall HSI score using documented combination rules, and (4) conversion of HSI to habitat units using habitat quantity and HSI scores. This modular structure promotes computational transparency, supports verification against known outcomes, and allows functions to be used independently when only part of the workflow is needed.

HSIplotter(SI, figure.name)

Plots suitability index curves relative to multiple variables.

Inputs are:

• SI: a matrix of suitability curves ordered as parameter breakpoints and associated suitability indices for each parameter with appropriate column names.
  
• figure.name: output figure file name structured as “filename.jpeg”.

Function returns a multi-panel *.jpeg figure showing all suitability curves (e.g., Figure 2).

HSIplotter

## function (SI, figure.name) 
## {
##     oldpar <- par("mfrow", "mgp", "mar")
##     on.exit(par(oldpar))
##     nSI <- length(colnames(SI))/2
##     SI.cont <- c()
##     for (i in 1:nSI) {
##         SI.cont[i] <- is.numeric(SI[1, 2 * i - 1])
##     }
##     jpeg(filename = figure.name, units = "in", width = 12, height = 4 * 
##         ceiling(nSI/3), res = 400)
##     par(mfrow = c(ceiling(nSI/3), 3), mgp = c(2, 0.5, 0), mar = c(3.5, 
##         3.5, 3, 1))
##     for (i in 1:nSI) {
##         if (SI.cont[i] == TRUE) {
##             plot(SI[, 2 * i - 1], SI[, 2 * i], pch = 19, col = "black", 
##                 xlab = colnames(SI)[2 * i - 1], ylab = "Suitability Index", 
##                 ylim = c(0, 1))
##             lines(SI[, 2 * i - 1], SI[, 2 * i], lwd = 2, col = "black")
##             box()
##         }
##         else {
##             barplot(SI[, 2 * i], names.arg = SI[, 2 * i - 1], 
##                 col = "black", xlab = colnames(SI)[2 * i - 1], 
##                 ylab = "Suitability Index", ylim = c(0, 1))
##             box()
##         }
##     }
##     invisible(dev.off())
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c0847a1990>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSIplotter(HSImodels$barredowl, "Fig02.BarredOwl.jpeg")

Figure 2. Example output from HSIplotter() for the barred owl model (Allen 1987).

SIcalc(SI, input.proj)

Computes suitability indices given a set of suitability curves and project-specific inputs. Suitability indices may be computed based on either linear interpolation (for continuous variables) or a lookup method (for categorical variables).

Inputs are:

• SI: a matrix of suitability curves ordered as parameter breakpoints and associated suitability indices for each parameter with appropriate column names.
  
• input.proj: numeric or categorical vector of application-specific input parameters associated with the suitability curve data from SI. Excluded variables should be entered as ‘NA.’

Function returns a vector of the suitability index values that match given user inputs. Values are returned as equal to the extreme of a range if inputs are outside of model range.

SIcalc

## function (SI, input.proj) 
## {
##     nSI <- length(colnames(SI))/2
##     SI.cont <- c()
##     for (i in 1:nSI) {
##         SI.cont[i] <- is.numeric(SI[1, 2 * i - 1])
##     }
##     SI.out <- c()
##     for (i in 1:nSI) {
##         if (length(input.proj) != nSI) {
##             SI.out <- "Number of inputs does not equal number of SI values."
##             break
##         }
##         else if (is.na(input.proj[i]) | input.proj[i] == "NA") {
##             SI.out[i] <- NA
##         }
##         else if (SI.cont[i] == TRUE) {
##             SI.out[i] <- approx(SI[, 2 * i - 1], SI[, i * 2], 
##                 xout = input.proj[i], method = "linear", rule = 2, 
##                 ties = "ordered")$y
##         }
##         else {
##             SI.out[i] <- SI[which(SI[, i * 2 - 1] == input.proj[i]), 
##                 i * 2]
##         }
##     }
##     return(SI.out)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c084bbddd0>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSIarimean(x)

Uses arithmetic mean to combine suitability indices into an overarching habitat suitability index.

Inputs are:

• x: a vector of suitability indices.

Function returns a value of habitat quality from 0 to 1 ignoring NA values.

HSIarimean

## function (x) 
## {
##     HSI <- mean(x, na.rm = TRUE)
##     if (HSI < 0 | HSI > 1) {
##         HSIout <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
##     }
##     else {
##         HSIout <- HSI
##     }
##     return(HSIout)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c084f3d488>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSIwarimean(x, w)

Uses a weighted arithmetic mean to combine suitability indices into an overarching habitat suitability index.

Inputs are:

• x: a vector of suitability indices.
  
• w: a vector of weights (0 to 1 values that must sum to one).

Function returns a value of habitat quality from 0 to 1 ignoring NA values.

HSIwarimean

## function (x, w) 
## {
##     if (length(w) != length(x)) {
##         wmean <- "Number of weights does not equal number of SI values."
##     }
##     else if (sum(w, na.rm = TRUE) != 1) {
##         wmean <- "Weights do not equal 1."
##     }
##     else if (sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE) < 0 | sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE) > 
##         1) {
##         wmean <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
##     }
##     else {
##         wmean <- sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE)
##     }
##     return(wmean)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c0851aa068>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSIgeomean(x)

Uses geometric mean to combine suitability indices into an overarching habitat suitability index.

Inputs are:

• x: a vector of suitability indices.

Function returns a value of habitat quality from 0 to 1 ignoring NA values.

HSIgeomean

## function (x) 
## {
##     HSI <- prod(x, na.rm = TRUE)^(1/length(which(is.na(x) != 
##         TRUE)))
##     if (HSI < 0 | HSI > 1) {
##         HSIout <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
##     }
##     else {
##         HSIout <- HSI
##     }
##     return(HSIout)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c0854b1d48>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSImin(x)

Uses the minimum of given suitability indices to calculate an overarching habitat suitability index.

Inputs are:

• x: a vector of suitability indices.

Function returns a value of habitat quality from 0 to 1 ignoring NA values.

HSImin

## function (x) 
## {
##     HSI <- min(x, na.rm = TRUE)
##     if (HSI < 0 | HSI > 1) {
##         HSIout <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
##     }
##     else {
##         HSIout <- HSI
##     }
##     return(HSIout)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c08175a7d0>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HSIeqtn(HSImodelname, SIV, HSImetadata, exclude)

Computes a habitat suitability index based on equations specified in USFWS habitat suitability models contained within ecorest via HSImodels and HSImetadata. Habitat suitability indices represent an overall assessment of habitat quality from combining individual suitability indices for multiple independent variables. The function computes an overall habitat suitability index. This function only applies to built-in index models described in Section 3.1.

Inputs are:

• HSImodelname: a character string in quotations that must match an existing model name in HSImetadata.
  
• SIV: a vector of suitability index values used in the model specified in HSImodelname.
  
• HSImetadata: a data frame of HSI model metadata within the ecorest package.
• exclude: a list of character strings specifying components to be excluded from calculations. See HSImetadata for a list of available model components.

Function returns a numeric of the habitat suitability index ranging from 0 to 1.

HSIeqtn

## function (HSImodelname, SIV, HSImetadata, exclude = NULL) 
## {
##     model.loc <- which(HSImetadata$model == HSImodelname)
##     SIV.name.gen <- names(which(colSums(!is.na(HSImetadata[model.loc, 
##         9:40])) > 0))
##     var.name <- c(SIV.name.gen, "CF", "CRF", "CRN", "CC", "CCRO", 
##         "CCRF", "CCF", "CCSF", "CCHF", "CWF", "CSF", "CFF", "CW", 
##         "CCB", "CB", "CN", "CNBC", "CCN", "CP", "CWQ", "CR", 
##         "CCR", "CD", "COT", "CL", "CEL", "CE", "CJ", "CFr", "CS", 
##         "CA", "CI", "CIN", "CNI", "CWFC", "CFBS", "CFSWF", "CSPF", 
##         "CWC", "CCFS", "CSS", "CT", "CTe", "CJA", "Eqtn")
##     HSI <- vector("list", length = length(var.name))
##     names(HSI) <- var.name
##     HSI$CF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CRF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CRF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CRN <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CRN[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CC <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CC[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCRO <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCRO[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCRF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCRF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCSF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCSF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCHF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCHF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CWF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CWF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CSF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CSF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CFF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CFF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CW <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CW[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCB <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCB[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CB <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CB[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CN <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CN[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CNBC <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CNBC[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCN <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCN[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CP <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CP[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CWQ <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CWQ[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CR <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CR[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCR <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCR[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CD <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CD[model.loc]))
##     HSI$COT <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$COT[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CL <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CL[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CEL <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CEL[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CE <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CE[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CJ <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CJ[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CFr <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CFr[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CS <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CS[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CA <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CA[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CI <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CI[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CIN <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CIN[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CNI <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CNI[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CWFC <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CWFC[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CFBS <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CFBS[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CFSWF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CFSWF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CSPF <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CSPF[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CWC <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CWC[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CCFS <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CCFS[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CSS <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CSS[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CT <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CT[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CTe <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CTe[model.loc]))
##     HSI$CJA <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$CJA[model.loc]))
##     HSI$Eqtn <- parse(text = paste(HSImetadata$Eqtn[model.loc]))
##     if (is.null(exclude) == FALSE) {
##         for (c in 1:length(exclude)) {
##             HSI[[which(names(HSI) == exclude[c])]] <- parse(text = paste(NA))
##         }
##     }
##     for (i in 1:length(SIV)) {
##         HSI[[i]] <- SIV[i]
##     }
##     HSI.out <- HSI
##     j <- length(SIV.name.gen)
##     HSI.out[[j + 1]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 2]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CRF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 3]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CRN))
##     HSI.out[[j + 4]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CC))
##     HSI.out[[j + 5]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCRO))
##     HSI.out[[j + 6]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCRF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 7]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 8]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCSF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 9]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCHF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 10]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CWF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 11]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CSF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 12]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CFF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 13]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CW))
##     HSI.out[[j + 14]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCB))
##     HSI.out[[j + 15]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CB))
##     HSI.out[[j + 16]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CN))
##     HSI.out[[j + 17]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CNBC))
##     HSI.out[[j + 18]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCN))
##     HSI.out[[j + 19]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CP))
##     HSI.out[[j + 20]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CWQ))
##     HSI.out[[j + 21]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CR))
##     HSI.out[[j + 22]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCR))
##     HSI.out[[j + 23]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CD))
##     HSI.out[[j + 24]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$COT))
##     HSI.out[[j + 25]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CL))
##     HSI.out[[j + 26]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CEL))
##     HSI.out[[j + 27]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CE))
##     HSI.out[[j + 28]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CJ))
##     HSI.out[[j + 29]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CFr))
##     HSI.out[[j + 30]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CS))
##     HSI.out[[j + 31]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CA))
##     HSI.out[[j + 32]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CI))
##     HSI.out[[j + 33]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CIN))
##     HSI.out[[j + 34]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CNI))
##     HSI.out[[j + 35]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CWFC))
##     HSI.out[[j + 36]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CFBS))
##     HSI.out[[j + 37]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CFSWF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 38]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CSPF))
##     HSI.out[[j + 39]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CWC))
##     HSI.out[[j + 40]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CCFS))
##     HSI.out[[j + 41]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CSS))
##     HSI.out[[j + 42]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CT))
##     HSI.out[[j + 43]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CTe))
##     HSI.out[[j + 44]] <- with(HSI, eval(HSI$CJA))
##     HSI.out[[j + 45]] <- with(HSI.out, eval(HSI.out$Eqtn))
##     HSI.out2 <- HSI.out[which(!is.na(HSI.out))]
##     HSI.out3 <- data.frame(HSI.out2)
##     if (length(SIV.name.gen) != length(SIV)) {
##         HSI.out4 <- "SIV vector length does not match equation."
##     }
##     else {
##         HSI.out4 <- ifelse(is.numeric(HSI.out3$Eqtn), HSI.out3$Eqtn, 
##             "NA with possible SIV input error.")
##     }
##     return(HSI.out4)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c08060e3b0>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

HUcalc(SI.out, habitat.quantity, HSIfunc, ...)

Computes habitat units given a set of suitability indices, a habitat suitability index equation, and habitat quantity.

Inputs are:

• SI.out: a vector of application-specific suitability indices, which can be produced from SIcalc or other functions.
  
• habitat.quantity: a numeric of habitat size associated with these suitability indices (i.e., length, area, or volume).
  
• HSIfunc: a function for combination of the suitability indices.
  
• ...: optional arguments to HSIfunc.

Function returns a vector of habitat quality, habitat quantity, and index units (quantity times quality).

HUcalc

## function (SI.out, habitat.quantity, HSIfunc, ...) 
## {
##     HU.out <- as.data.frame(matrix(NA, nrow = 1, ncol = 3))
##     colnames(HU.out) <- c("Quality", "Quantity", "IndexUnits")
##     HU.out$Quality <- HSIfunc(SI.out, ...)
##     HU.out$Quantity <- habitat.quantity
##     HU.out$IndexUnits <- HU.out$Quality * HU.out$Quantity
##     return(HU.out)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c07e2b4dc0>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

3.3. Decision Support Engine

This section documents the decision support functions in ecorest used to compare restoration alternatives when benefits are non-monetary and costs are monetary (or otherwise expressed in different units). The functions implement standard cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analysis concepts by (1) converting time-varying outcomes to time-averaged metrics when needed, (2) identifying cost-effective alternatives that form the efficient frontier, (3) evaluating incremental trade-offs along that frontier to identify “best buys,” and (4) producing standardized tabular and graphical summaries for interpretation and reporting.

annualizer(timevec, benefits)

Computes time-averaged quantities based on linear interpolation.

Inputs are:

• timevec: numeric vector of time intervals.
  
• benefits: numeric vector of values to be interpolated.

Function returns a time-averaged value over the specified time horizon.

annualizer

## function (timevec, benefits) 
## {
##     if (length(timevec) != length(benefits)) {
##         benefits.avgann <- "Number of time points does not equal number of benefit values."
##     }
##     else {
##         ntime <- length(timevec)
##         time.intervals <- timevec[-1] - timevec[-ntime]
##         area.rec <- time.intervals * apply(cbind(benefits[-ntime], 
##             benefits[-1]), 1, min)
##         area.tri <- 0.5 * time.intervals * abs(benefits[-ntime] - 
##             benefits[-1])
##         benefits.avgann <- sum(area.rec + area.tri)/(max(timevec) - 
##             min(timevec))
##     }
##     return(benefits.avgann)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c081e49810>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

CEfinder(benefit, cost)

Returns cost-effectiveness analysis for a particular set of alternatives.

Inputs are:

• benefit: a vector of restoration benefits. Typically, these are time-averaged ecological outcomes (e.g., average annual habitat units). Often project benefits are best presented as the “lift” associated with a restoration action(i.e., the benefits of an alternative minus the benefits of a “no action” plan).
  
• cost: a vector of restoration costs. Typically, these are monetary costs associated with a given restoration action such as project first cost or annualized economic cost. Notably, these functions are agnostic to units, so costs could also be non-monetary such as lost political capital or social costs of each alternative.

Function returns a numeric vector identifying each plan as cost-effective (1) or non-cost-effective (0). The cost-effective actions comprise the Pareto frontier of non-dominated alternatives at a given level of cost or benefit.

CEfinder

## function (benefit, cost) 
## {
##     CE <- c()
##     for (i in 1:length(benefit)) {
##         bigben <- which(benefit >= benefit[i])
##         CE[i] <- ifelse(length(which(cost[bigben] <= cost[i])) == 
##             1, 1, 0)
##     }
##     return(CE)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c0831089d0>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

BBfinder(benefit, cost, CE)

Examines the slope of the cost-effectiveness frontier to isolate how unit cost (cost/benefit) increases with increasing environmental benefit. Restoration actions with the lowest slope of unit cost are considered “best buys”.

Inputs are:

• benefit: a vector of restoration benefits. Typically, these are time-averagedecological outcomes (e.g., average annual habitat units). Often project benefits are best presented as the “lift” associated with a restoration action(i.e., the benefits of an alternative minus the benefits of a “no action” plan).
  
• cost: a vector of restoration costs. Typically, these are monetary costs associated with a given restoration action such as project first cost or annualized economic cost. Notably, these functions are agnostic to units, so costs could also be non-monetary such as lost political capital or social costs of each alternative.
  
• CE: numeric vector of 0’s and 1’s indicating whether a plan is cost-effective (1) or non-cost-effective (0). Can be derived from CEfinder.

Function returns a list with summaries of all restoration actions as well as best buy plans only.

BBfinder

## function (benefit, cost, CE) 
## {
##     ben.CE <- benefit[which(CE == 1)]
##     cost.CE <- cost[which(CE == 1)]
##     nCE <- length(ben.CE)
##     ben.CE2 <- ben.CE[order(cost.CE)]
##     cost.CE2 <- cost.CE[order(cost.CE)]
##     BB <- c(1)
##     for (i in 1:nCE) {
##         ce.bentemp <- ben.CE2[-1:-BB[i]]
##         ce.costtemp <- cost.CE2[-1:-BB[i]]
##         inccost <- (ce.costtemp - cost.CE2[BB[i]])/(ce.bentemp - 
##             ben.CE2[BB[i]])
##         BB[i + 1] <- which(inccost == min(inccost)) + BB[i]
##         if (BB[i + 1] >= nCE) {
##             break
##         }
##     }
##     nBB <- length(BB)
##     ben.BB <- ben.CE2[BB]
##     cost.BB <- cost.CE2[BB]
##     inccost.BB <- (cost.BB[-1] - cost.BB[-nBB])/(ben.BB[-1] - 
##         ben.BB[-nBB])
##     BB.find <- c()
##     for (i in 1:nBB) {
##         BB.find[i] <- which(benefit == ben.BB[i] & cost == cost.BB[i])
##     }
##     BB.loc <- rep_len(0, length.out = length(benefit))
##     BB.loc[BB.find] <- 1
##     BB.out <- list()
##     BB.out[[1]] <- cbind(benefit, cost, CE, BB.loc)
##     colnames(BB.out[[1]]) <- c("benefit", "cost", "CE", "BB")
##     BB.out[[2]] <- cbind(ben.BB, cost.BB, c(0, inccost.BB))
##     colnames(BB.out[[2]]) <- c("benefit", "cost", "inccost")
##     return(BB.out)
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c083632e80>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

CEICAplotter(altnames, benefit, cost, CE, BB, figure.name)

Plots summary outputs of Cost-effective Incremental Cost Analysis (CEICA) in *.jpeg format.

Inputs are:

• altnames: a vector of numerics or characters as unique restoration action identifiers.
  
• benefit: a vector of restoration benefits. Typically, these are time-averagedecological outcomes (e.g., average annual habitat units). Often project benefits are best presented as the “lift” associated with a restoration action(i.e., the benefits of an alternative minus the benefits of a “no action” plan).
  
• cost: a vector of restoration costs. Typically, these are monetary costs associated with a given restoration action such as project first cost or annualized economic cost. Notably, these functions are agnostic to units, so costs could also be non-monetary such as lost political capital or social costs of each alternative.
  
• CE: numeric vector of 0’s and 1’s indicating whether a plan is cost-effective (1) or non-cost-effective (0). Can be derived from CEfinder.
  
• BB: numeric vector of 0’s and 1’s indicating whether a plan is a best buy (1) or not (0). Can be derived by isolating select outputs from BBfinder.
  
• figure.name: output figure file name structured as “filename.jpeg”.

Function returns a multi-panel *.jpeg figure summarizing cost-effectiveness and incremental cost analysesvalue of habitat quality from 0 to 1 ignoring NA values.

CEICAplotter

## function (altnames, benefit, cost, CE, BB, figure.name) 
## {
##     oldpar <- par("mfrow", "mgp", "mar")
##     on.exit(par(oldpar))
##     nalt <- length(altnames)
##     nCE <- sum(CE)
##     nBB <- sum(BB)
##     ben.CE <- benefit[which(CE == 1)]
##     cost.CE <- cost[which(CE == 1)]
##     ben.CE.order <- ben.CE[order(cost.CE)]
##     cost.CE.order <- cost.CE[order(cost.CE)]
##     ben.BB <- benefit[which(BB == 1)]
##     cost.BB <- cost[which(BB == 1)]
##     ben.BB.order <- ben.BB[order(cost.BB)]
##     cost.BB.order <- cost.BB[order(cost.BB)]
##     inccost.BB <- (cost.BB.order[-1] - cost.BB.order[-nBB])/(ben.BB.order[-1] - 
##         ben.BB.order[-nBB])
##     CEICA.col <- viridis(nBB)
##     leg.name <- c()
##     for (i in 1:nBB) {
##         leg.name[i] <- altnames[which(benefit == ben.BB.order[i] & 
##             cost == cost.BB.order[i])]
##     }
##     jpeg(filename = figure.name, units = "in", width = 12, height = 6, 
##         res = 400)
##     par(mfrow = c(1, 2), mgp = c(2, 0.5, 0), mar = c(3.5, 3.5, 
##         3, 1))
##     plot(c(0, 1), c(0, 1), type = "n", xlim = range(benefit), 
##         ylim = range(cost), axes = FALSE, xlab = "Ecological Benefit", 
##         ylab = "Cost", main = "(A) Cost-Effectiveness Analysis")
##     grid()
##     box()
##     axis(1)
##     axis(2, at = axTicks(2), labels = prettyNum(axTicks(2), big.mark = ",", 
##         scientific = FALSE), las = 0, cex.axis = 0.75, tick = TRUE)
##     points(benefit, cost, pch = 1, cex = 0.8, col = "black")
##     lines(ben.CE.order, cost.CE.order, lwd = 2)
##     points(ben.CE.order, cost.CE.order, pch = 19, cex = 1, col = "black")
##     points(ben.BB.order, cost.BB.order, pch = 1, lwd = 3, cex = 3, 
##         col = CEICA.col)
##     legend("topleft", legend = c("All Plans", "Cost-Effective Frontier", 
##         "Best Buys"), lwd = c(NA, 2, NA), pch = c(1, 19, 1), 
##         pt.cex = c(0.8, 1, 3), col = c("black", "black", viridis(1)), 
##         bg = "white")
##     plot(c(0, 1), c(0, 1), type = "n", xlim = range(ben.BB), 
##         ylim = c(0, max(inccost.BB)), axes = FALSE, xlab = "Ecological Benefit", 
##         ylab = "Incremental Cost per Benefit (cost/unit)", main = "(B) Incremental Cost Analysis")
##     box()
##     axis(1)
##     axis(2, at = axTicks(2), labels = prettyNum(axTicks(2), big.mark = ",", 
##         scientific = FALSE), las = 0, cex.axis = 0.75, tick = TRUE)
##     for (i in 1:(nBB - 1)) {
##         xtemp <- c(ben.BB.order[i], ben.BB.order[i + 1], ben.BB.order[i + 
##             1], ben.BB.order[i])
##         ytemp <- c(0, 0, inccost.BB[i], inccost.BB[i])
##         polygon(xtemp, ytemp, col = CEICA.col[i + 1], border = "black")
##     }
##     legend("topleft", legend = leg.name[-1], fill = CEICA.col[-1], 
##         bg = "white")
##     invisible(dev.off())
## }
## <bytecode: 0x000002c083f84928>
## <environment: namespace:ecorest>

4. Evaluation

Ecological models typically rely on multiple variables or ecological processes, and in many cases present a variety of ecological outcomes. Models can quickly become complex system representations with many components, inputs, assumptions, and modules. Model evaluation is the process for ensuring that numerical tools are scientifically defensible and transparently developed. Evaluation is often referred to as verification or validation, but it in fact includes a family of methods ranging from peer review to model testing to error checking (Schmolke et al. 2010). In this more general sense, evaluation should include the following (Grant and Swannack 2008): (1) assessing the reasonableness of model structure, (2) assessing functional relationships and verifying code, (3) evaluating model behavior relative to expected patterns, (4) comparing outcomes to empirical data, if possible, and (5) analyzing uncertainty in predictions. The USACE has established an ecological model certification process to ensure that planning models are sound and functional. These generally consist of evaluating tools relative to the three following categories: system quality, technical quality, and usability (EC 1105-2-412).

4.1. System Quality

To confirm proper functionality, the ecorest package was rigorously assessed and peer-reviewed to ensure computational and numerical accuracy. System quality was assessed following best practices from McKay et al. (2022).

4.1.1 Quality Assurance

Workflow planning and consistency: The ecorest package was designed with a common workflow to ensure that HSI models were implemented clearly and consistently. All models were coded with consistent formatting in HSImetadata and HSImodels, and naming conventions were implemented to ensure clarity when reviewing model parameters (Appendix B).

Team-based coding: Version 1.0.0 of ecorest was designed jointly by S.K. McKay and D.D. Hernandez-Abrams using team-based coding. Following package implementation, K.C. Cushway conducted a thorough review of model structure and accuracy by revisiting the model documentation from the USFWS for every HSI model in ecorest to identify potential errors and ensure code accuracy. Model updates or improvements are implemented in versions 2.0.0 and 2.0.1.

Error reporting: To communicate issues to users and reviewers, functions in ecorest were designed to generate error messages in the event of incorrect inputs or user errors. Common error messages in ecorest include incorrect number of input errors, out of range errors, and errors regarding incorrect formatting.

Examples of some error messages associated with various ecorest functions:

# Error message in HSI functions if HSI values are not within 0-1 range
if (HSI < 0 | HSI > 1) {
  HSIout <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
}

# Error messages in HSIwarimean indicating an incorrect number of inputs, incorrect values for inputs, and incorrect outputs
if (length(w) != length(x)) {
  wmean <- "Number of weights does not equal number of SI values."
} else if (sum(w, na.rm = TRUE) != 1) {
         wmean <- "Weights do not equal 1."
  } else if (sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE) < 0 | sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE) > 
        1) {
        wmean <- "Habitat suitability index not within 0 to 1 range."
    } else {
         wmean <- sum(x * w, na.rm = TRUE)
      }

# Error message indicating an incorrect number of time points has been entered in the annualizer function
if (length(timevec) != length(benefits)) {
  benefits.avgann <- "Number of time points does not equal number of benefit values."
     }

Documentation: Comprehensive documentation of functions in ecorest was auto-generated by R during publication and can be accessed at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ecorest/ecorest.pdf. Documentation includes descriptions of each function, their arguments and outputs, relevant references in the literature, and example applications. In addition, the authors documented all changes made to the package during error checking, including the nature of the changes, the reasoning for updates, and confirmation of implementation.

4.1.2 Quality Control

Interim code checking: During model integration into R, code functionality was checked periodically for each HSI model to ensure that models were operational, implemented correctly, and performed as expected. In addition, all models with USFWS documentation that included test data sets (n = 152 of 349) were verified for accuracy using all available test data (Appendix C). In cases where HSIeqtn outputs did not match USFWS outputs, models were independently verified to determine whether mismatches were due to rounding errors, coding issues in ecorest, or probable errors in USWFS documentation.

Formal model testing: Prior to release of ecorest version 2.1.0, every function in the package was tested to determine whether strategically selected inputs resulted in expected outcomes (Appendix C). For functions that require mathematical calculations, expected (i.e., correct) inputs, inputs with NA values, and invalid inputs were tested to ensure that functions properly handled both error messages and correct outputs.Where applicable, functions were also tested to ensure that inputs with mismatched lengths resulted in an error message.Each function was tested between 300 and 9999 times, depending on inputs (Appendix C).

4.1.3 Model updates: peer review and version control

R packages published and maintained on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) undergo automated reviews prior to initial package release and every package update to ensure that they are functional and compatible with multiple versions of R software, and that dependencies or reverse dependencies remain functional (Wickham and Bryan 2023). Every initial R package submission is subject to both this automated review and an additional human review to ensure that it meets the CRAN standards for quality assurance (Wickham and Bryan 2023). Version 1.0.0 of ecorest passed the automated and human reviews at initial submission, and both automated reviews for updates to version 2.0.0, 2.0.1, and 2.1.0. The newest version of ecorest, v 2.1.0, is currently available on CRAN at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ecorest/index.html, and older versions are archived on CRAN at https://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/Archive/ecorest/.

4.2. Technical Quality

All blue-book HSI models included in ecorest are literature-based and grounded in expert opinion. To further assess each model’s technical quality, a sensitivity and uncertainty analysis was performed (Cushway et al., in review). Results of each analysis are summarized in PDF format at https://github.com/EcoModTeam/ecorest-sensitivity-and-uncertainty, but users interested in evaluating model technical quality may consider running their own sensitivity and uncertainty analysis using the process outlined in Appendix D, as the current analysis was generalized for all models and made relatively broad assumptions about parameter and output probability distributions.

4.3. Usability

Usability: Model software / hardware availability or requirements (e.g., ACE-IT approval). Input data availability, formatting, and processing. Output format and processing. Training availability. Technical support by developer, model documents, etc. Model accessibility (e.g., open source code, web-service, version control). Proprietary / black box?

Other considerations: USACE policy compliance and conformance. End-user capability. Adaptability for future applications (same system new data, different systems). Archival (code, model maintenance, new programming languages, etc.).

In general for USACE: R is globally available and free. R is ACE-IT approved. Simple formatting.

Within R-package:

• Help documentation
  
• Help includes examples
• Insert.

5. Application and Communication

Provide a brief walk-through of application of each function. Appendix provides integrated examples of functions used together for ecosystem restoration decisions. Other appendix provides user’s guide.

Considerations for Application: What are some of the key limitations (geographic, numerical, system type)? Look back at conceptual model limits, numerical limits, etc. This should be a synthesis for future teams. What’s not in the model that the user needs to know about?

Future improvement:

• Add more models: modified mink, modified bluegill, oyster, HGM, etc.
  
• Planned adaptation of the model.
  
• Key research needs.

Communication

• Identify audience: Who is using the results of the model?
  
• Visualization: How are data used, interpreted, presented? Can this be modified to increase understanding of the model?
  
• Develop communication plan: What is the target? Training plans, tutorials, outreach. Community adoption strategy – what is the sales plan?

6. Summary

Insert brief review with some highlights. Major approach? Key findings? Model limitations?

Acknowledgements

Funding: EMRRP

Ideas and collaboration: Nate Richards, Tyler Keys, Christina Saltus, Brook Herman, Carra Carrillo

Testers: Michael Dougherty, Mick Porter, Danny Allen, Robin Armetta, etc.

References

Allen, A.W. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: barred owl. U.S. Fish Wild. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.143). 17 pp

Brinson M.M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Technical Report WRP-DE-4. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station.

Carrillo C., McKay S.K., and Swannack T.S. 2020. Ecological Model Development: Toolkit for interActive Modeling (TAM). ERDC TN-EMRRP-??. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Fischenich J.C. 2008. The application of conceptual models to ecosystem restoration. ERDC TN-EBA-TN-08-1. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Grant W.E. and Swannack T.M. 2008. Ecological modeling: A common-sense approach to theory and practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Herman B.D., McKay S.K., Altman S., Richards N.S., Reif M., Piercy C.D., and Swannack T.M. 2019. Unpacking the black box: Demystifying ecological models through mediated modeling and hands-on learning. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 7 (122), doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2019.00122.

Hijmans R.J. and Ghosh A. 2019. Spatial data analysis with R. https://rspatial.org/.

McKay S.K. 2009. Reducing spreadsheet errors. ERDC TN-EMRRP-EBA-03. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

McKay, S. Kyle, Darixa D. Hernandez-Abrams, and Kiara C. Cushway. 2025. ecorest: Conducts Analyses Informing Ecosystem Restoration Decisions. R package, version 2.0.1. Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ecorest

McKay S.K., Pruitt B.A., Zettle B., Hallberg N., Hughes C., Annaert A., Ladart M., and McDonald J. 2018a. Proctor Creek Ecological Model (PCEM): Phase 1-Site screening. ERDC/EL TR-18-11. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

McKay S.K., Pruitt B.A., Zettle B.A., Hallberg N., Moody V., Annaert A., Ladart M., Hayden M., and McDonald J. 2018b. Proctor Creek Ecological Model (PCEM): Phase 2-Benefits analysis. ERDC/EL TR-18-11. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

McKay S.K., Richards N., and Swannack T.M. 2019. Aligning ecological model development with restoration project planning. ERDC EMRRP-SR-89. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

McKay, S.K., Richards, N., and Swannack T.M. 2022. Ecological model development: evaluation of system quality. ERDC/TN EMRRP-EBA-26. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

McMahin, TE, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Walleye. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.56. 43 pp. 

Palesh G. and Anderson D. 1990. Modification of the habitat suitability index model for the bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) for winter conditions for the Upper Mississippi River backwater habitats.

R Core Team. 2019. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.

Robinson R. Hansen W., and Orth K. 1995. Evaluation of environmental investments procedures manual interim: Cost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses. IWR Report 95-R-1. Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia.

Smith R.D., Ammann A., Bartoldus C., and Brinson M.M. 1995. An approach for assessing wetland functions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference wetlands, and functional indices. Technical Report WRP-DE-9. Vicksburg, MS: Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.

Stuber R.J., Gebhart G., and Maughan O.E. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Bluegill. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.8. 26 pp.

Swannack T.M., Fischenich J.C., and Tazik D.J. 2012. Ecological modeling guide for ecosystem restoration and management. ERDC/EL TR-12-18. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

Swannack T.M., Reif M., and Soniat T.M. 2014. A robust, spatially explicit model for identifying oyster restoration sites: Case studies on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Journal of Shellfish Research, 33 (2), 395-408.

Tirpak J.M., Jones Farrand D., Thompson F.R., Twedt D.J., Baxter C.K., Fitzgerald J.A., and Uihlein W.B. 2009. Assessing ecoregional scale habitat suitability index models for priority landbirds. The Journal of Wildlife Management 73:1307-1315.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1999. Civil Works Ecosystem Restoration Policy. ER 1165-2-501. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.

USACE. 2000. Planning Guidance Notebook. ER-1105-2-100. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.

USACE. 2011. Assuring quality of planning models. EC-1105-2-412. Washington, DC. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

USACE. 2014. Appendix C: Environment. EC-11-2-206. Headquarters, USACE, Washington, D.C.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980a. Habitat as a basis for environmental assessment. Ecological Services Manual, 101.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980b. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP). Ecological Services Manual, 102.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. Standards for the Development of Habitat Suitability Index Models. Ecological Services Manual, 103.

Wickham, H. and Bryan, J. 2023. R packages: organize, test, document, and share your code. 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media , Sebastopol CA, uSA.

Appendix A: Glossary and Acronyms

• Eco-PCX: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ ecosystem restoration planning center of expertise.
  
• ecorest: R-package for conducting analyses informing ecosystem restoration decisions as described in this document.
• ERDC: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
  
• FWOP: Future WithOut Project Conditions.
• R: Statistical software language used to program ecorest (R Core Team 2019).
  
• USACE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
  
• USFWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Appendix B: USFWS Habitat Suitability Models included in ecorest

Table B-1. USFWS Habitat Suitability Index models included in ecorest.

Model Name	Taxa	Documentation	Link
alewifeJuv	Alosa pseudoharengus	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
alewifeJuvAndSAEL	Alosa pseudoharengus	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
alewifeSAEL	Alosa pseudoharengus	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
americanalligatorNontidal	Alligator mississippiensis	Newsom, JD, T Joanen, and RJ Howard. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: American alligator. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.136). 14 pp.	pdf
americanalligatorTidal	Alligator mississippiensis	Newsom, JD, T Joanen, and RJ Howard. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: American alligator. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.136). 14 pp.	pdf
americanblackduckWinteringEVegWetland	Anas rubripes	Lewis, JC, and RL Garrison. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: American black duck (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.68. 16 pp.	pdf
americanblackduckWinteringNCapeCod	Anas rubripes	Lewis, JC, and RL Garrison. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: American black duck (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.68. 16 pp.	pdf
americanblackduckWinteringSCapeCod	Anas rubripes	Lewis, JC, and RL Garrison. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: American black duck (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.68. 16 pp.	pdf
americancoot	Fulica americana	Allen, AW. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American coot. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.115). 17 pp.	pdf
americaneiderBreeding	Somateria mollissima dresseri	Blumton, AK, RB Owen Jr, and WB Krohn. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: American eider (breeding). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.149). 24 pp.	pdf
americanoysterGulfofMexModifier	Crassostrea virginica	Cake Jr, EW. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Gulf of Mexico American oyster. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.f57. 37 pp.	pdf
americanoysterGulfofMexTypical	Crassostrea virginica	Cake Jr, EW. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Gulf of Mexico American oyster. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.f57. 37 pp.	pdf
americanshadEstu	Alosa sapidissima	Stier, DJ, and JH Crance. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: American shad. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.88) 34 pp.	pdf
americanshadRiv	Alosa sapidissima	Stier, DJ, and JH Crance. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: American shad. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.88) 34 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedDry	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedMoist	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedWet	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubDry	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubMoist	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubWet	Scolopax minor	Cade, BS. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: American woodcock (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.105) 23 pp.	pdf
arcticgrayling	Thymallus arcticus	Hubert, WA, RS Helzner, LA Lee, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Arctic grayling riverine populations. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.110). 34 pp	pdf
atlanticcroakerLATideLt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerLATideMt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerOtherTideLt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerOtherTideMt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerWetlandLATideLt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerWetlandLATideMt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerWetlandOtherTideLt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
atlanticcroakerWetlandOtherTideMt0.5m	Micropogonias undulatus	Diaz, RJ, and CP Onuf. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile Atlantic croaker (revised). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.98). 23 pp.	pdf
bairdssparrow	Ammodramus bairdii	Sousa, PJ, and WN McDonal. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Baird’s sparrow. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.44. 12 pp.	pdf
baldeagleBreeding	Haliaeetus leucocephalus	Peterson, A. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Bald eagle (breeding season). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.126). 25 pp.	pdf
barredowl	Strix varia	Allen, AW. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: barred owl. U.S. Fish Wild. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.143). 17 pp.	pdf
beaverLacAreaLt8ha	Castor canadensis	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Beaver. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.30. 20 pp	pdf
beaverLacAreaMtoe8ha	Castor canadensis	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Beaver. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.30. 20 pp	pdf
beaverPalu	Castor canadensis	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Beaver. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.30. 20 pp	pdf
beaverRiv	Castor canadensis	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Beaver. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.30. 20 pp	pdf
beltedkingfisherLenticConstWave	Ceryle alcyon	Prose, BL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Belted kingfisher. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.87). 22 pp.	pdf
beltedkingfisherLenticNoConstWave	Ceryle alcyon	Prose, BL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Belted kingfisher. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.87). 22 pp.	pdf
beltedkingfisherLotic	Ceryle alcyon	Prose, BL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Belted kingfisher. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.87). 22 pp.	pdf
bigmouthbuffaloLacNoSal	Ictiobus cyprinellus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Bigmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10/34. 23 pp.	pdf
bigmouthbuffaloLacSal	Ictiobus cyprinellus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Bigmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10/34. 23 pp.	pdf
bigmouthbuffaloRivNoSal	Ictiobus cyprinellus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Bigmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10/34. 23 pp.	pdf
bigmouthbuffaloRivSal	Ictiobus cyprinellus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Bigmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10/34. 23 pp.	pdf
blackbear	Ursus americanus	Rogers, LL, and AW Allen. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: black bear, Upper Great Lakes Region. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10/144). 54 pp.	pdf
blackbelliedwhistlingduck	Dendrocygna autumnalis	McKenzie, PM, and PJ Zwank. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: black-bellied whistling-duck (breeding). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.150). 22 pp	pdf
blackbrant	Branta bernicla nigricans	Schroeder, RL. 1984. Habitat suitabilitly index models: Black brant. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.63. 11 pp.	pdf
blackbullheadLac	Ictalurus melas	Stuber, RJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black bullhead. U.S. Dept. int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.14. 25 pp.	pdf
blackbullheadRiv	Ictalurus melas	Stuber, RJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black bullhead. U.S. Dept. int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.14. 25 pp.	pdf
blackcappedchickadeeFoodCanH	Poecile atricapillus	Schroeder, RL. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Black-capped chickadee. FWS/OBS-82/10.37. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.	pdf
blackcappedchickadeeFoodCanVol	Poecile atricapillus	Schroeder, RL. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Black-capped chickadee. FWS/OBS-82/10.37. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.	pdf
blackcrappieLacNoSal	Pomoxis nigromaculatus	Edwards, EA., DA. Krieger, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.6. 25 pp.	pdf
blackcrappieLacSal	Pomoxis nigromaculatus	Edwards, EA, DA Krieger, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.6. 25 pp.	pdf
blackcrappieRivNoSal	Pomoxis nigromaculatus	Edwards, EA, DA Krieger, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.6. 25 pp.	pdf
blackcrappieRivSal	Pomoxis nigromaculatus	Edwards, EA, DA Krieger, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Black crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.6. 25 pp.	pdf
blacknosedaceLac	Rhinichthys atratulus	Trial, JG, JG Stanley, M Batcheller, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Blacknose dace. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.41. 28 pp.	pdf
blacknosedaceRiv	Rhinichthys atratulus	Trial, JG, JG Stanley, M Batcheller, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Blacknose dace. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.41. 28 pp.	pdf
blackshoulderedkite	Elanus caeruleus	Faanes, CA, and RJ Howard. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: black-shouldered kite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.130). 13 pp.	pdf
blacktailedprairiedog	Cynomys ludovicianus	Clippinger, NW. 1989. Habitat suitability index models: Black-tailed prairie dog. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.156). 21 pp.	pdf
bluegillLac	Lepomis macrochirus	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Bluegill. USFWS Report FWS/OBS-82/10.8. 26pp.	pdf
bluegillRiv	Lepomis macrochirus	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Bluegill. USFWS Report FWS/OBS-82/10.8. 26pp.	pdf
bluegrouse	Dendragapus obscurus	Schroeder, RL. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Blue grouse. U.S. Fish Wildl. Servo FWS/OBS-82/10.81. 19 pp.	pdf
blueherringJuv	Alosa aestivalis	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
blueherringJuvAndSAEL	Alosa aestivalis	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
blueherringSAEL	Alosa aestivalis	Pardue, GB. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: alewife and blueback herring. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.58. 22pp.	pdf
bluewingedtealBreeding	Spatula discors	Sousa, PJ. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Blue-winged teal (breeding). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.114). 36 pp.	pdf
bobcatLt4ha	Felis rufus	Boyle, KA, and TT Fendley. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: bobcat. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.147). 16 pp.	pdf
bobcatMtoe4ha	Felis rufus	Boyle, KA, and TT Fendley. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: bobcat. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.147). 16 pp.	pdf
brewerssparrow	Spizella breweri	Short, HL. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Brewer’s sparrow. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82	pdf
brooktroutLacAllLtoe15C	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brooktroutLacAllMt15C	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brooktroutRivAllLtoe15CLtoe5mEC	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brooktroutRivAllLtoe15CMt5mEC	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brooktroutRivAllMt15CLtoe5mEC	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brooktroutRivAllMt15CMt5mEC	Salvelinus fontinalis	Raleigh, RF. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Brook trout. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. 42 pp.	pdf
brownshrimpNGulfofMex	Penaeus aztecus	Turner, RE, and MS Brody. 1983 Habitat suitability index models : northern Gulf of Mexico brown shrimp and white shrimp. U.S. Dept. of Int. Fish Wildl. Serv , FWS/OBS-82/l0.54. 24 pp.	pdf
brownthrasher	Toxostoma rufum	Cade, BS. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Brown thrasher. U.S. Fish Wild. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.118). 14 pp.	pdf
browntroutCompLtoe10C	Salmo trutta	Raleigh, RF, LD Zuckerman, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Brown trout, revised. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 82(10.124) 65 pp	pdf
browntroutCompMt10C	Salmo trutta	Raleigh, RF, LD Zuckerman, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Brown trout, revised. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 82(10.124) 65 pp	pdf
browntroutLimitLtoe10C	Salmo trutta	Raleigh, RF, LD Zuckerman, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Brown trout, revised. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 82(10.124) 65 pp	pdf
browntroutLimitMt10C	Salmo trutta	Raleigh, RF, LD Zuckerman, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Brown trout, revised. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 82(10.124) 65 pp	pdf
bullfrog	Rana catesbeiana	Graves, BM, and SH Anderson. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: bullfrog. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.138). 22 pp.	pdf
cactuswren	Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus	Short, HL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Cactus wren. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.96). 15 pp.	pdf
canvasbackBreeding	Aythya valisineria	Schroeder, RL. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Canvasback (breeding habitat). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.82. 16 pp.	pdf
channelcatfishLac	Ictalurus punctatus	McMahon, TE., and JW Terrell. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Channel catfish. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.2. 29 pp.	pdf
channelcatfishRiv	Ictalurus punctatus	McMahon, TE, and JW Terrell. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Channel catfish. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.2. 29 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonComp5to10CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonComp5to10CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonCompLtoe5CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonCompLtoe5CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonCompMt10CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonCompMt10CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimit5to10CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimit5to10CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimitLtoe5CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimitLtoe5CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimitMt10CSand	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chinooksalmonLimitMt10CSilt	Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Raleigh, RF, WJ Miller, and PC Nelson. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: chinook salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.122). 64 pp.	pdf
chumsalmonAlevin	Oncorhynchus keta	Hale, SS, TE McMahon, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Chum salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.108). 48 pp.	pdf
chumsalmonEyedEmb	Oncorhynchus keta	Hale, SS, TE McMahon, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Chum salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.108). 48 pp.	pdf
clapperrail	Rallus longirostris	Lewis, JC, and RL Garrison. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: clapper rail. U. S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Servo FWSjOBS-82jl0.51. 15 pp.	pdf
cohosalmonSpringSummerSeaMig	Oncorhynchus kisutch	McMahon, TE. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Coho salmon. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.49. 29 pp	pdf
cohosalmonWinterRearing	Oncorhynchus kisutch	McMahon, TE. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Coho salmon. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.49. 29 pp	pdf
commoncarpLacNoSal	Cyprinus carpio	Edwards, EA, and KA Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Common carp. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.12. 27 pp.	pdf
commoncarpLacSal	Cyprinus carpio	Edwards, EA, and KA Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Common carp. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.12. 27 pp.	pdf
commoncarpRivNoSal	Cyprinus carpio	Edwards, EA, and KA Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Common carp. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.12. 27 pp.	pdf
commoncarpRivSal	Cyprinus carpio	Edwards, EA, and KA Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Common carp. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.12. 27 pp.	pdf
commonshinerLac	Luxilus cornutus	Trial, JG, CS Wade, JG Stanley, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Common shiner. US Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.40. 22pp.	pdf
commonshinerRiv	Luxilus cornutus	Trial, JG, CS Wade, JG Stanley, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Common shiner. US Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.40. 22pp.	pdf
creekchubRivLargerStrmDistMt5km	Semotilus atromaculatus	McMahon, TE. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Creek chub. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.4 23 pp.	pdf
creekchubRivLargerStrmDistWithin5km	Semotilus atromaculatus	McMahon, TE. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Creek chub. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.4 23 pp.	pdf
cutthroatLacGenLtoe15C	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatLacGenMt15C	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatLacLahontanLtoe15C	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatLacLahontanMt15C	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivGenLtoe15CLtoe5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivGenLtoe15CMt5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivGenMt15CLtoe5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivGenMt15CMt5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivLahontanLtoe15CLtoe5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivLahontanLtoe15CMt5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivLahontanMt15CLtoe5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
cutthroatRivLahontanMt15CMt5m	Oncorhynchus clarkii	Hickman, T, and RF Raleigh. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Cutthroat trout. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.5. 38 pp.	pdf
diamondbackterrapinNesting	Malaclemys terrapin	Palmer, WM, and CL Cordes. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: Diamondback terrapin (nesting)–Atlantic coast. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.151). 18 pp.	pdf
downywoodpecker	Picoides pubescens	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Downy woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.38. 10 pp.	pdf
easternbrownpelican	Pelecanus occidentalis carolinensis	Hingtgen, TM, R Mulholland, and AV Zale. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: eastern brown pelican. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.90). 20 pp.	pdf
easterncottontail	Sylvilagus floridanus	Allen, AW. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern cottontail. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.66. 23 pp.	pdf
easternmeadowlark	Sturnella magna	Schroeder, RL, and PJ Sousa. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern meadowlark. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.29. 9 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyCroplandHerb	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyCroplandShrub	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH25.4cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH27.9cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH30.5cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH33.0cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH35.6cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH38.1cm	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyHerb	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
easternwildturkeyShrub	Meleagris gallopavo sylvestris	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Eastern wild turkey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.106). 33 pp.	pdf
englishsoleJuv	Parophrys vetulus	Toole, CL, RA Barnhart, and CP Onuf. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile English sole. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.133). 27 pp.	pdf
englishsoleJuvImpactAlt	Parophrys vetulus	Toole, CL, RA Barnhart, and CP Onuf. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: juvenile English sole. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.133). 27 pp.	pdf
fallfishLac	Semotilus corporalis	Trial, JG, CS Wade, JG Stanley, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Fallfish. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.48. 15 pp.	pdf
fallfishRivNoSpwn	Semotilus corporalis	Trial, JG, CS Wade, JG Stanley, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Fallfish. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.48. 15 pp.	pdf
fallfishRivSpwn	Semotilus corporalis	Trial, JG, CS Wade, JG Stanley, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Fallfish. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.48. 15 pp.	pdf
ferruginoushawkCrop	Buteo regalis	Jasikoff, TM. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Ferruginous hawk. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.10. 18 pp.	pdf
ferruginoushawkHerbAndShrub	Buteo regalis	Jasikoff, TM. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Ferruginous hawk. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.10. 18 pp.	pdf
fieldsparrow	Spizella pusilla	Sousa, PJ. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Field sparrow. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.62. 14 pp.	pdf
fisherWinterCov	Pekania pennanti	Allen, AW. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Fisher. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.45. 19 pp	pdf
flatheadcatfishMacro	Pylodictis olivaris	Lee, LA, and JW Terrell. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Flathead catfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.152). 39pp.	pdf
flounderGulf	Paralichthys albigutta	Enge, KM, and R Mulholland. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: southern and gulf flounders. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.92). 25 pp	pdf
flounderSouthern	Paralichthys albigutta	Enge, KM, and R Mulholland. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: southern and gulf flounders. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.92). 25 pp	pdf
forstersternBreeding	Sterna forsteri	Martin, RP, and PJ Zwank. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Forster’s tern (breeding)–Gulf and Atlantic coasts. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.131). 21 pp.	pdf
foxsquirrel	Sciurus niger	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: fox squirrel. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.18. 11 pp.	pdf
gadwallBreeding	Anas strepera	Sousa, PJ. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Gadwall (breeding). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.100). 35 pp.	pdf
gizzardshadLacNoTributaries	Dorosoma cepedianum	Williamson, KL, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Gizzard shad. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.112). 33 pp.	pdf
gizzardshadLacSpwnTributaries	Dorosoma cepedianum	Williamson, KL, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Gizzard shad. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.112). 33 pp.	pdf
graypartridge	Perdix perdix	Allen, AW. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Gray partridge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.73). 23 pp.	pdf
graysquirrel	Sciurus carolinensis	Allen, AW. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: gray squirrel, revised. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.135). 16 pp. [First printed as: FWS/OBS-82/10.19. July 1982.]	pdf
greatblueheron	Ardea herodias	Short, HL, and RJ Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Great blue heron. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.99). 23 pp.	pdf
greategretFeeding	Ardea alba	Chapman, BR, and RJ Howard. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: great egret. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.78. 23 pp.	pdf
greategretNestingIsland	Ardea alba	Chapman, BR, and RJ Howard. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: great egret. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.78. 23 pp.	pdf
greategretNestingNonisland	Ardea alba	Chapman, BR, and RJ Howard. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: great egret. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.78. 23 pp.	pdf
greaterprairiechickenHarvested	Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus	Prose, BL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Greater prairie-chicken (multiple levels of resolution). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biiol. Rep. 82(10.102). 33 pp.	pdf
greaterprairiechickenUnharvested	Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus	Prose, BL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Greater prairie-chicken (multiple levels of resolution). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biiol. Rep. 82(10.102). 33 pp.	pdf
greatersandhillcraneLt200ha	Grus canadensis tabida	Armbruster, MJ. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: greater sandhill crane. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.140). 26 pp	pdf
greatersandhillcraneMtoe200ha	Grus canadensis tabida	Armbruster, MJ. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: greater sandhill crane. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.140). 26 pp	pdf
greaterwhitefrontedgooseWinteringWetland	Anser albinfrons	Kaminski, RM. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: greater white-fronted goose (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.116). 14 pp.	pdf
greensunfishLac	Lepomis cyanellus	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Green sunfish. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.15. 28 pp	pdf
greensunfishRiv	Lepomis cyanellus	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Green sunfish. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.15. 28 pp	pdf
greensunfishRivSal	Lepomis cyanellus	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Green sunfish. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.15. 28 pp	pdf
gulfmenhadenEstuary	Brevoortia patronus	Christmas, JY, JT McBee, RS Waller, and FC Scutter III. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Gulf menhaden. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.23. 23 pp.	pdf
gulfmenhadenMarine	Brevoortia patronus	Christmas, JY, JT McBee, RS Waller, and FC Scutter III. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Gulf menhaden. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.23. 23 pp.	pdf
hairywoodpecker	Dryobates villosus	Sousa, PJ. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: hairy woodpecker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.146). 19 pp.	pdf
hardclam	Mercenaria campechiensis and Mercenaria mercenaria	Mulholland, R. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: hard clam. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.77. 21 pp	pdf
inlandsilversideNoZooplankton	Menidia beryllina	Weinstein, MP. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Inland silverside. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.120). 25 pp.	pdf
inlandsilversideZooplankton	Menidia beryllina	Weinstein, MP. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Inland silverside. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.120). 25 pp.	pdf
laketroutReproducingLakes	Salvelinus namaycush	Marcus, MD, WA Hubert, and SH Anderson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Lake trout (Exclusive of the Great Lakes). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.84. 12 pp.	pdf
laketroutReproducingRes	Salvelinus namaycush	Marcus, MD, WA Hubert, and SH Anderson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Lake trout (Exclusive of the Great Lakes). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.84. 12 pp.	pdf
laketroutStocked	Salvelinus namaycush	Marcus, MD, WA Hubert, and SH Anderson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Lake trout (Exclusive of the Great Lakes). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.84. 12 pp.	pdf
largemouthbassLacN	Micropterus salmoides	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Largemouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.16. 32 pp.	pdf
largemouthbassLacS	Micropterus salmoides	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Largemouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.16. 32 pp.	pdf
largemouthbassRivGrad	Micropterus salmoides	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Largemouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.16. 32 pp.	pdf
largemouthbassRivVel	Micropterus salmoides	Stuber, RJ, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Largemouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.16. 32 pp.	pdf
larkbunting	Calamospiza melanocorys	Finch, DM, SH Anderson, and WA Hubert. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: lark bunting. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.137). 16 pp.	pdf
laughinggull	Leucophaeus atricilla	Zale, AV, and R Mulholland. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: laughing gull. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.94). 23 pp.	pdf
leastternVegCovLt15OrMt25pct	Sterna antillarum	Carreker, RG. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Least tern. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.103). 29 pp.	pdf
leastternVegCovMtoe15OrLtoe25pct	Sterna antillarum	Carreker, RG. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Least tern. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.103). 29 pp.	pdf
lesserscaupBreeding	Aythya affinis	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Lesser scaup (breeding). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.117). 16 pp.	pdf
lesserscaupWintering	Aythya affinis	Mulholland, R. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: lesser scaup (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.91). 15 pp.	pdf
lessersnowgooseWintering	Anser caerulescens	Leslie, JC, and PJ Zwank. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: lesser snow goose (wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.97). 16 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerSummerDeciduousDesertic	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerSummerEvergreen	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerWinterCropland	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerWinterNotEForC	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerYearRoundDeciduousDesertic	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
lewiswoodpeckerYearRoundEvergreen	Melanerpes lewis	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Lewis’s woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.32. 14 pp.	pdf
littleneckclam	Protothaca staminea	Rodnick, K, and HW Li. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: littleneck clam. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.59. 15 pp.	pdf
longnosedaceLac	Rhinichthys cataractae	Edwards, EA, H Li, and CB Schreck. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Longnose dace. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.33. 13 pp.	pdf
longnosedaceRiv	Rhinichthys cataractae	Edwards, EA, H Li, and CB Schreck. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Longnose dace. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.33. 13 pp.	pdf
longnosesuckerLac	Catostomus catostomus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Longnose sucker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/1-.35. 21 pp.	pdf
longnosesuckerRiv	Catostomus catostomus	Edwards, EA. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Longnose sucker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/1-.35. 21 pp.	pdf
mallardCroplandCorn	Anas platyrhynchos	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitablity index models: mallard (winter habitat, Lower Mississippi Valley). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.132). 37 pp.	pdf
mallardCroplandOtherCrops	Anas platyrhynchos	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitablity index models: mallard (winter habitat, Lower Mississippi Valley). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.132). 37 pp.	pdf
mallardCroplandSoy	Anas platyrhynchos	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitablity index models: mallard (winter habitat, Lower Mississippi Valley). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.132). 37 pp.	pdf
mallardForestedPaluWetlands	Anas platyrhynchos	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitablity index models: mallard (winter habitat, Lower Mississippi Valley). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.132). 37 pp.	pdf
mallardNonforestedPaluLacRiv	Anas platyrhynchos	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitablity index models: mallard (winter habitat, Lower Mississippi Valley). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.132). 37 pp.	pdf
marshwren	Cistothorus palustris	Gutzwiller, KJ, and SH Anderson. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: marsh wren. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.139). 13 pp.	pdf
marten	Martes americana	Allen, AW. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Marten. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.11. 9 pp.	pdf
minkPaluEmergHerb	Mustela vison	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: mink, revised. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.127). 23 pp. [First printed as: FWS/OBS-82/10.61, October 1983.]	pdf
minkPaluForestedOrShrubLess405ha	Mustela vison	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: mink, revised. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.127). 23 pp. [First printed as: FWS/OBS-82/10.61, October 1983.]	pdf
minkPaluForestedOrShrubMore405ha	Mustela vison	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: mink, revised. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.127). 23 pp. [First printed as: FWS/OBS-82/10.61, October 1983.]	pdf
minkRivLac	Mustela vison	Allen, AW. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: mink, revised. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.127). 23 pp. [First printed as: FWS/OBS-82/10.61, October 1983.]	pdf
mooseLakeSupModelII	Alces alces	Allen, AW, PA Jordan, and JW Terrell. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: moose, Lake Superior region. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.155). 47 pp.	pdf
mottledduckAny	Anas fulvigula maculosa	Rorabaugh, JE, and PJ Zwank. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: mottled duck. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Service FWS/OBS-82/10.5226 pp.	pdf
mottledduckBrood	Anas fulvigula maculosa	Rorabaugh, JE, and PJ Zwank. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: mottled duck. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Service FWS/OBS-82/10.5226 pp.	pdf
mottledduckNesting	Anas fulvigula maculosa	Rorabaugh, JE, and PJ Zwank. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: mottled duck. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Service FWS/OBS-82/10.5226 pp.	pdf
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveA	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveB	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveC	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveD	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveA	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveB	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveC	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveD	Esox masquinongy	Cook, MF, and RC Solomon. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: Muskellunge. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.148). 33 pp.	pdf
muskratEstu	Ondatra zibethicus	Allen, AW, and RD Hoffman. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Muskrat. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.46. 27 pp.	pdf
muskratHW	Ondatra zibethicus	Allen, AW, and RD Hoffman. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Muskrat. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.46. 27 pp.	pdf
muskratRiv	Ondatra zibethicus	Allen, AW, and RD Hoffman. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Muskrat. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.46. 27 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteCroplands	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh25.4cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh27.9cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh30.5cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh33.0cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh35.6cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteDbh38.1cm	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernbobwhiteShrub	Colinus virginianus	Schroeder, RL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Northern bobwhite. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.104). 32 pp.	pdf
northernpikeLacVegA	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeLacVegB	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeLacVegC	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeLacVegD	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeRivVegA	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeRivVegB	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeRivVegC	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpikeRivVegD	Esox lucius	Inskip, PD. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Northern pike. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.17. 40 pp.	pdf
northernpintail	Anas acuta	Suchy, WJ, and SH Anderson. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: northern pintail. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.145) 23 pp.	pdf
northernpintailWinteringGulfCoastPaluLacEstuLtoe5ppt	Anas acuta	Howard, RJ, and HA Kantrud. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: northern pintail (gulf coast wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.121). 16 pp.	pdf
northernpintailWinteringGulfPaluLacEstuMt5ppt	Anas acuta	Howard, RJ, and HA Kantrud. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: northern pintail (gulf coast wintering). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.121). 16 pp.	pdf
ospreyLac	Pandion haliaetus	Vana-Miller, SL. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: osprey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.154). 46 pp.	pdf
ospreyRiv	Pandion haliaetus	Vana-Miller, SL. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: osprey. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.154). 46 pp.	pdf
paddlefishAdSummerandWinterHab	Polyodon spathula	Hubert, WA, SH Anderson, PD Southhall, and JH Crance. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Paddlefish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.80. 32 pp.	pdf
paddlefishSpwnHab	Polyodon spathula	Hubert, WA, SH Anderson, PD Southhall, and JH Crance. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Paddlefish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.80. 32 pp.	pdf
pileatedwoodpeckerE	Dryocopus pileatus	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Pileated woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.39. 15 pp.	pdf
pileatedwoodpeckerW	Dryocopus pileatus	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Pileated woodpecker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.39. 15 pp.	pdf
pinewarbler	Setophaga pinus	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: pine warbler. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.28. 8 pp.	pdf
pinksalmonLimit	Oncorhynchus gorbuscha	Raleigh, RF, and PC Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Pink salmon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.109). 36 pp.	pdf
pinkshrimpEmergAndSeagrassVeg	Farfantepenaeus duorarum	Mulholland, R. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: pink shrimp. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.76. 17 pp.	pdf
pinkshrimpEmergVeg	Farfantepenaeus duorarum	Mulholland, R. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: pink shrimp. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.76. 17 pp.	pdf
pinkshrimpSeagrassVeg	Farfantepenaeus duorarum	Mulholland, R. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: pink shrimp. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.76. 17 pp.	pdf
plainssharptailedgrouse	Tympanuchus phasianellus jamesi	Prose, BL. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: plains sharp-tailed grouse. U.S. Fish Wilsl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.142). 31 pp.	pdf
pronghorn	Antilocapra americana	Allen, AW, JG Cook, and MJ Armbruster. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Pronghorn. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10. 65. 22 pp.	pdf
rainbowtroutLac	Oncorhynchus mykiss	Raleigh, RF, T Hickman, RC Solomon, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Rainbow trout. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.60. 64 pp.	pdf
rainbowtroutRiv	Oncorhynchus mykiss	Raleigh, RF, T Hickman, RC Solomon, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Rainbow trout. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.60. 64 pp.	pdf
redbreastsunfishLacN	Lepomis auritus	Aho, JM, CS Anderson, and JW Terrell. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: redbreast sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.119). 23 pp	pdf
redbreastsunfishLacS	Lepomis auritus	Aho, JM, CS Anderson, and JW Terrell. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: redbreast sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.119). 23 pp	pdf
redbreastsunfishPalu	Lepomis auritus	Aho, JM, CS Anderson, and JW Terrell. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: redbreast sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.119). 23 pp	pdf
redbreastsunfishRiv	Lepomis auritus	Aho, JM, CS Anderson, and JW Terrell. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: redbreast sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.119). 23 pp	pdf
reddrumLarvJuvEstuLittleSubmVeg	Sciaenops ocellatus	Buckley, J. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: larval and juvenile red drum. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.74. 15 pp.	pdf
reddrumLarvJuvEstuSubmVeg	Sciaenops ocellatus	Buckley, J. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: larval and juvenile red drum. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.74. 15 pp.	pdf
redearsunfishLac	Lepomis microlophus	Twomey, KA, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Redear sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.79. 29 pp.	pdf
redearsunfishRiv	Lepomis microlophus	Twomey, KA, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Redear sunfish. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.79. 29 pp.	pdf
redheadWinteringWtrAvailable	Aythya americana	Howard, RJ, and HA Kantrud. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: redhead (wintering). U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.53. 14 pp	pdf
redheadWinteringWtrNotAvailable	Aythya americana	Howard, RJ, and HA Kantrud. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: redhead (wintering). U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.53. 14 pp	pdf
redkingcrabJuv1to4	Paralithodes camtschaticus	Jewett, SC, and CP Onuf. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: red king crab. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.153). 34 pp.	pdf
redkingcrabJuv4PlusandAd	Paralithodes camtschaticus	Jewett, SC, and CP Onuf. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: red king crab. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.153). 34 pp.	pdf
redkingcrabLarv	Paralithodes camtschaticus	Jewett, SC, and CP Onuf. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: red king crab. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.153). 34 pp.	pdf
redkingcrabYoungofYrJuv	Paralithodes camtschaticus	Jewett, SC, and CP Onuf. 1988. Habitat suitability index models: red king crab. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.153). 34 pp.	pdf
redspottednewtAquatic150m	Notophthalmus viridescens viridescens	Sousa, PJ. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-spotted newt. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.111). 18 pp.	pdf
redspottednewtAquaticEntire	Notophthalmus viridescens viridescens	Sousa, PJ. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-spotted newt. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.111). 18 pp.	pdf
redspottednewtTerrestrial	Notophthalmus viridescens viridescens	Sousa, PJ. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-spotted newt. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.111). 18 pp.	pdf
redwingedblackbirdA	Agelaius phoeniceus	Short, HL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-winged blackbird. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.95). 20 pp.	pdf
redwingedblackbirdB	Agelaius phoeniceus	Short, HL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-winged blackbird. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.95). 20 pp.	pdf
redwingedblackbirdC	Agelaius phoeniceus	Short, HL. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Red-winged blackbird. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.95). 20 pp.	pdf
roseatespoonbillIslandFuture	Platalea ajaja	Lewis, JC. 1983. Habitat suitabililty index models: roseate spoonbill. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish. Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.50. 16 pp.	pdf
roseatespoonbillIslandPresent	Platalea ajaja	Lewis, JC. 1983. Habitat suitabililty index models: roseate spoonbill. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish. Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.50. 16 pp.	pdf
roseatespoonbillMainlandFuture	Platalea ajaja	Lewis, JC. 1983. Habitat suitabililty index models: roseate spoonbill. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish. Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.50. 16 pp.	pdf
roseatespoonbillMainlandPresent	Platalea ajaja	Lewis, JC. 1983. Habitat suitabililty index models: roseate spoonbill. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish. Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.50. 16 pp.	pdf
ruffedgrouse	Bonasa umbellus	Cade, BS, and PJ Sousa. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Ruffed grouse. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.86). 31 pp.	pdf
shortnosesturgeon	Acipenser brevirostrum	Crance, JH. 1986. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Shortnose sturgeon. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.129). 31 pp.	pdf
sliderturtle	Trachemys scripta	Morreale, SJ, and JW Gibbons. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Slider turtle. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.125). 14 pp.	pdf
sloughdarterLac	Etheostoma gracile	Edwards, EA, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Slough darter. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.9. 13 pp.	pdf
sloughdarterRiv	Etheostoma gracile	Edwards, EA, M Bacteller, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Slough darter. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.9. 13 pp.	pdf
smallmouthbassLac	Micropterus dolomieu	Edwards, EA, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Smallmouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.36. 47 pp.	pdf
smallmouthbassRiv	Micropterus dolomieu	Edwards, EA, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Smallmouth bass. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.36. 47 pp.	pdf
smallmouthbuffaloLac	Ictiobus bubalus	Edwards, EA, and K Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Smallmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.13. 28 pp.	pdf
smallmouthbuffaloRiv	Ictiobus bubalus	Edwards, EA, and K Twomey. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Smallmouth buffalo. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.13. 28 pp.	pdf
snappingturtle	Chelydra serpentina	Graves, BM, and SH Anderson. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: snapping turtle. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.141). 18 pp.	pdf
snowshoehareForageBiomass	Lepus americanus	Carreker, RG. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Snowshoe hare. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.101). 21 pp.	pdf
snowshoehareForageVisual	Lepus americanus	Carreker, RG. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Snowshoe hare. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.101). 21 pp.	pdf
southernkingfishEstu	Menticirrhus americanus	Sikora, WB, and JP Sikora. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Southern kingfish. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.31. 22 pp.	pdf
southernkingfishMarine	Menticirrhus americanus	Sikora, WB, and JP Sikora. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Southern kingfish. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.31. 22 pp.	pdf
southernredbackedvole	Clethrionomys gapperi	Allen, AW. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Southern red-backed vole (Western United States). U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.42. 14 pp.	pdf
spotJuv	Leiostomus xanthurus	Stickney, RR, and ML Cuenco. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Juvenile spot. U.S. Dept. Int. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.20. 12 pp.	pdf
spottedbassLac	Micropterus punctulatus	McMahon, TE, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Spotted bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.72. 41 pp.	pdf
spottedbassRiv	Micropterus punctulatus	McMahon, TE, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Spotted bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.72. 41 pp.	pdf
spottedowl	Strix occidentalis	Laymon, SA, H Salwasser, and RH Barrett. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Spotted owl. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.113) 14 pp.	pdf
spottedseatrout	Cynoscion nebulosus	Kostecki, PT. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: spotted seatrout. U.S.Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.75. 22 pp.	pdf
steelheadtroutRiv	Oncorhynchus mykiss	Raleigh, RF, T Hickman, RC Solomon, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Rainbow trout. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.60. 64 pp.	pdf
stripedbassCoastal	Morone saxatilis	Bain, MB, and JL Bain. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Coastal stocks of striped bass. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-82/10.1. 29 pp.	pdf
stripedbassInlandLacAd	Morone saxatilis	Crance, JH. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Inland stocks of striped bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.85. 63 pp.	pdf
stripedbassInlandLacJuv	Morone saxatilis	Crance, JH. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Inland stocks of striped bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.85. 63 pp.	pdf
stripedbassInlandLacLarv	Morone saxatilis	Crance, JH. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Inland stocks of striped bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.85. 63 pp.	pdf
stripedbassInlandRiv	Morone saxatilis	Crance, JH. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Inland stocks of striped bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.85. 63 pp.	pdf
swamprabbitForestedWetland	Sylvilagus aquaticus	Allen, AW. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Swamp rabbit. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.107). 20 pp.	pdf
swamprabbitHerbWetland	Sylvilagus aquaticus	Allen, AW. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Swamp rabbit. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.107). 20 pp.	pdf
swamprabbitShrubForestedWetland	Sylvilagus aquaticus	Allen, AW. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Swamp rabbit. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.107). 20 pp.	pdf
veeryNonWetland	Catharus fuscescens	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Veery. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.22. 12 pp.	pdf
veeryWetland	Catharus fuscescens	Sousa, PJ. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Veery. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.22. 12 pp.	pdf
walleyeLacSecchiLtoe3.4m	Sander vitreus	McMahin, TE, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Walleye. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.56. 43 pp.	pdf
walleyeLacSecchiMt3.4m	Sander vitreus	McMahin, TE, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Walleye. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.56. 43 pp.	pdf
walleyeRivSecchiLtoe3.4m	Sander vitreus	McMahin, TE, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Walleye. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.56. 43 pp.	pdf
walleyeRivSecchiMt3.4m	Sander vitreus	McMahin, TE, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Walleye. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.56. 43 pp.	pdf
warmouthLac	Lepomis gulosus	McMahon, TE, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Warmouth. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.67. 21 pp.	pdf
warmouthRiv	Lepomis gulosus	McMahon, TE, G Gebhart, OE Maughan, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: Warmouth. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.67. 21 pp.	pdf
westerngrebe	Aechmophorus occidentalis	Short, HL 1984. Habitat suitability index models: Western grebe. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.69. 20 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacCurveASubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacCurveBSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacCurveCSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacTribCurveASubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacTribCurveBSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassLacTribCurveCSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassRivCurveASubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassRivCurveBSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitebassRivCurveCSubsIndex	Morone chrysops	Hamilton, K, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability index curves: White bass. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.89). 35 pp.	pdf
whitecrappieLac	Pomoxis annularis	Edwards, EA, DA Krieger, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: White crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.7. 22 pp.	pdf
whitecrappieRiv	Pomoxis annularis	Edwards, EA, DA Krieger, G Gebhart, and OE Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: White crappie. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.7. 22 pp.	pdf
whiteibisIsland	Eudocimus albus	Hingtgen, TM, R Mulholland, and RW Repenning. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: white ibis. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.93) 18 pp.	pdf
whiteibisWetland	Eudocimus albus	Hingtgen, TM, R Mulholland, and RW Repenning. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: white ibis. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.93) 18 pp.	pdf
whiteshrimpNGulfofMex	Farfantepenaeus aztecus	Turner, RE, and MS Brody. 1983. Habitat suitability index models : northern Gulf of Mexico brown shrimp and white shrimp. U.S. Dept. of Int. Fish Wildl. Serv , FWS/OBS-82/l0.54. 24 pp.	pdf
whitesuckerLacSpwnInletStrm	Catostomus commersonii	Twomey, KA, KL Williamson, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: White sucker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56 pp.	pdf
whitesuckerLacSpwnLake	Catostomus commersonii	Twomey, KA, KL Williamson, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: White sucker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56 pp.	pdf
whitesuckerLacSpwnLakeDrawMtoe2m	Catostomus commersonii	Twomey, KA, KL Williamson, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: White sucker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56 pp.	pdf
whitesuckerLacSpwnLakeDrawMtoe5m	Catostomus commersonii	Twomey, KA, KL Williamson, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: White sucker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56 pp.	pdf
whitesuckerRiv	Catostomus commersonii	Twomey, KA, KL Williamson, and PC Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: White sucker. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56 pp.	pdf
whitetaileddeerModelII	Odocoileus virginianus	Short, HL. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: White-tailed deer in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic coastal plains. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.123). 36 pp.	pdf
williamsonssapsucker	Sphyrapicus thyroideus	Sousa, PJ. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Williamson’s sapsucker. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.47. 13 pp.	pdf
woodduckBreeding	Aix sponsa	Sousa, PJ, and AH Farmer. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Wood duck. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.43. 27 pp.	pdf
woodduckWinter	Aix sponsa	Sousa, PJ, and AH Farmer. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Wood duck. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.43. 27 pp.	pdf
woodduckYear	Aix sponsa	Sousa, PJ, and AH Farmer. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Wood duck. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.43. 27 pp.	pdf
yellowheadedblackbird	Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: yellow-headed blackbird. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.26. 12 pp.	pdf
yellowperchLac	Perca flavescens	Krieger, DA, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Yellow perch. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.55. 37 pp.	pdf
yellowperchRiv	Perca flavescens	Krieger, DA, JW Terrell, and PC Nelson. 1983. Habitat suitability information: Yellow perch. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.55. 37 pp.	pdf
yellowwarbler	Setophaga petechia	Schroeder, RL. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: Yellow warbler. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.27. 7 pp.	pdf

Table B-2. Standardized variable naming convention used in defining USFWS HSI models.

Abbreviation	Definition
abund	abundance
ad	adult
aq	aquatic
avg	mean
C	Deg. C.
can	canopy
cmps	cm/sec
comp	composition
cov	cover or covered
curr	current
d	depth
decid	decidous
dev	development
dis	discharge
dist	distance
DO	Dissolved Oxygen
DS	Dissolved Solids
e	embryo
env	environment
gs	ground surface
h	height
hab	habitat
herb	herbaceous
juv	juvenile
kgpha	kg/ha
l	length
lac	lacustrine
larv	larvae/larval
lbspacre	lbs/acre
litt	littoral
lt	<
ltoe	?
m	meters
max	Max
max	maximum
mgpl	mg/l
mgpreypm3	mg-prey/m^3
min	Min
mpkm	m/km
mth	monthly
num	number
pct	%
perm	permanent
pl	pool(s)
pop	population
rfl	riffle(s)
sa	surface area
sal	salinity
spwn	spawning
sqm	m^2
stand	standing
strm	stream
subm	submerged
subs	substrate
suit	suitable
turb	turbidity
veg	vegetative or vegatation
vel	velocity
w	width
wtr	water

Appendix C: Model Testing Records

Table C-1. Testing records for HSI models in ecorest. Of the 349 models in ecorest, 152 had USFWS documentaion that included example datasets for testing.

Model	Testing.notes
alewifeJuv	No data available
alewifeJuvAndSAEL	No data available
alewifeSAEL	No data available
americanalligatorNontidal	Tested with dataset 1 and 3
americanalligatorTidal	Tested with dataset 2
americanblackduckWinteringEVegWetland	Tested with dataset 3
americanblackduckWinteringNCapeCod	Tested with dataset 1
americanblackduckWinteringSCapeCod	Tested with dataset 2
americancoot	No data available
americaneiderBreeding	Tested with datasets 1-3
americanoysterGulfofMexModifier	Tested with datasets 1-5
americanoysterGulfofMexTypical	Tested with datasets 1-5
americanshadEstu	Tested with datasets 1-4
americanshadRiv	Tested with datasets 1-4
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedDry	No data available
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedMoist	No data available
americanwoodcockWinteringForestedWet	No data available
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubDry	No data available
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubMoist	No data available
americanwoodcockWinteringShrubWet	No data available
arcticgrayling	Tested with datasets 1-3
atlanticcroakerLATideLt0.5m	Checked with provided dataset
atlanticcroakerLATideMt0.5m	Checked with provided dataset
atlanticcroakerOtherTideLt0.5m	Checked with provided dataset
atlanticcroakerOtherTideMt0.5m	Checked with provided dataset
atlanticcroakerWetlandLATideLt0.5m	No data available
atlanticcroakerWetlandLATideMt0.5m	No data available
atlanticcroakerWetlandOtherTideLt0.5m	No data available
atlanticcroakerWetlandOtherTideMt0.5m	No data available
bairdssparrow	No data available
baldeagleBreeding	No data available
barredowl	No data available
beaverLacAreaLt8ha	No data available
beaverLacAreaMtoe8ha	No data available
beaverPalu	No data available
beaverRiv	No data available
beltedkingfishLenticConstWave	No data available
beltedkingfishLenticNoConstWave	No data available
beltedkingfishLotic	No data available
bigmouthbuffaloLacNoSal	Tested with datasets 1-3; CCF of dataset 2 is incorrect (should be 0.52) and CCF and CR appear wrong in dataset 3 in literature example
bigmouthbuffaloLacSal	No data available
bigmouthbuffaloRivNoSal	Tested with datasets 1-3; CR of dataset 3 is incorrect (should be 0.3)
bigmouthbuffaloRivSal	No data available
blackbear	No data available
blackbelliedwhistlingduck	Tested with datasets 1-3
blackbrant	No data available
blackbullheadLac	Tested with 3 datasets, Dataset 1 seems to have incorrect CC value in documentation but model matches results for other datasets
blackbullheadRiv	Checked with datasets 1, 2, and 3; seems correct but authors rounded weirdly so numbers were a little different
blackcappedchickadeeFoodCanH	No data available
blackcappedchickadeeFoodCanVol	No data available
blackcrappieLacNoSal	CR is slightly off in dataset 2 and 3; independently verify
blackcrappieLacSal	CR is slightly off in dataset 2 and 3; independently verify
blackcrappieRivNoSal	Tested with datasets 1-3; table includes SIV14 but does not seem to use it in calculations
blackcrappieRivSal	SIV14 says lacustrine only, but there is an option to include SIV14 in the riverine model
blacknosedaceLac	Tested with datasets 1-3
blacknosedaceRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3; might be good to have someone test removing life stages?
blackshoulderedkite	Results do not match example data because equation is different to account for area weighting
blacktailedprairiedog	No data available
bluegillLac	Tested with datasets 1, 2, and 3; CWQ for dataset 2 is off by a little- independently verify
bluegillRiv	Tested with datasets 1, 2, and 3: Dataset 1, CWQ should be 0.4 because SIV8=0.4? Possible error in documentation?
bluegrouse	No data available
blueherringJuv	No data available
blueherringJuvandSAEL	No data available
blueherringSAEL	No data available
bluewingedtealBreeding	No data available
bobcatLt4ha	No data available
bobcatMtoe4ha	No data available
brewerssparrow	No data available
brooktroutLacAllLtoe15C	No data available
brooktroutLacAllMt15C	No data available
brooktroutRivAllLtoe15CLtoe5mEC	Tested with dataset 1 all components
brooktroutRivAllLtoe15CMt5mEC	No data available
brooktroutRivAllMt15CLtoe5mEC	Tested with dataset 2 all components
brooktroutRivAllMt15CMt5mEC	No data available
brownshrimpNGulfMex	Tested with datasets 1-4
brownthrasher	No data available
browntroutCompLtoe10C	Tested with sample dataset; CFr value is incorrect, but typo in documentation; CA adjusted is also wrong, but the documentation says limited by SIV3, which is not included in CA?
browntroutCompMt10C	Tested with sample dataset; CFr value is incorrect, but typo in documentation; CE produces 0.7 because it IS SIV3 limited, typo in documentation?
browntroutLimitLtoe10C	Tested with sample dataset; CFr value is incorrect, but typo in documentation
browntroutLimitMt10C	Tested with sample dataset; CFr value is incorrect, but typo in documentation
bullfrog	No data available
cactuswren	No data available
canvasbackBreeding	No data available
channelcatfishLac	Tested with datasets 1-3; all correct except CC for dataset 3 is off by a very small amount
channelcatfishRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3; CR is slightly off for all three datasets; have someone check equation independently
chinooksalmonComp5to10CSand	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonComp5to10CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonCompLtoe5CSand	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonCompLtoe5CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonCompMt10CSand	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonCompMt10CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1; CE is wrong but probably typo because SIV12=0.6?
chinooksalmonLimit5to10CSand	Tested with Dataset 1
chinooksalmonLimit5to10CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1
chinooksalmonLimitLtoe5CSand	Tested with Dataset 1
chinooksalmonLimitLtoe5CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1
chinooksalmonLimitMt10CSand	Tested with Dataset 1
chinooksalmonLimitMt10CSilt	Tested with Dataset 1
chumsalmonAlevin	No data available
chumsalmonEyedEmb	No data available
clapperrail	Checked with datasets 1-3
cohosalmonSpringSummerSeaMig	No data available
cohosalmonWinterRearing	No data available
commoncarpLacNoSal	HSI scores for dataset 1 and 3 in docs are incorrect (#1 uses a value of 0.7 for COT in the final equation rather than 0.4, and #3 neglects to account for SIV12 being <=0.4); Storage ratio graph from documentation is much smoother, but no actual breakpoints are provided
commoncarpLacSal	HSI scores for dataset 1 and 3 in docs are incorrect (#1 uses a value of 0.7 for COT in the final equation rather than 0.4, and #3 neglects to account for SIV12 being <=0.4); Storage ratio graph from documentation is much smoother, but no actual breakpoints are provided
commoncarpRivNoSal	No data available
commoncarpRivSal	No data available
commonshinerLac	Tested with datasets 1-3
commonshinerRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3
creekchubRivLargerStrmDistMt5km	Tested with datasets 1-2; CC incorrect for dataset 2, may be typo; recheck; Example data in dataset 3 does not align with what is shown on the graph for SIV1
creekchubRivLargerStrmDistWithin5km	Tested with dataset 3; HSI is incorrect because authors did not account for full equation being smaller than CR; recheck
cutthroatLacGenLtoe15C	No data available
cutthroatLacGenMt15C	No data available
cutthroatLacLahontanLtoe15C	No data available
cutthroatLacLahontanMt15C	No data available
cutthroatRivGenLtoe15CLtoe5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivGenLtoe15CMt5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivGenMt15CLtoe5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivGenMt15CMt5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivLahontanLtoe15CLtoe5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivLahontanLtoe15CMt5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivLahontanMt15CLtoe5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
cutthroatRivLahontanMt15CMt5m	Tested with datasets 1-3; HSI is incorrect for Dataset 1, but should be 0.95 because CA<final equation, so error in documentation; Dataset 2, CJ and COT are wrong, but can’t find error and HSI is wrong but again should be equal to CA; Dataset 3, CJ in documentation is incorrect (should be 0.3 since SIV15<=0.4); Final HSI should also be 0.3; COT is also wrong, but unsure why
diamondbackterrapinNesting	Tested with datasets 1-3
downywoodpecker	No data available
easternbrownpelican	Tested with example datasets
easterncottontail	No data available
easternmeadowlark	No data available
easternwildturkeyCroplandHerb	No data available
easternwildturkeyCroplandShrub	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH25.4cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH27.9cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH30.5cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH33.0cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH35.6cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyForestHardDBH38.1cm	No data available
easternwildturkeyHerb	No data available
easternwildturkeyShrub	No data available
englishsoleJuv	Tested with datasets 1-2
englishsoleJuvImpactAlt	Tested with dataset 3
fallfishLac	Tested with datasets 1 and 2
fallfishRivNoSpwn	No data available
fallfishRivSpwn	Tested with datasets 1 and 2
ferruginoushawkCrop	No data available
ferruginoushawkHerbAndShrub	No data available
fieldsparrow	No data available
fisherWinterCov	No data available
flatheadcatfishMacro	No data available
flounderGulf	Tested with datasets 1-3
flounderSouthern	Tested with datasets 1-4
forstersternBreeding	Tested with datasets 1-3
foxsquirrel	No data available
gadwallBreeding	No data available
gizzardshadLacNoTributaries	No data available
gizzardshadLacSpwnTributaries	No data available
graypartridge	No data available
graysquirrel	No data available
greatblueheron	No data available
greategretFeeding	Tested with dataset 1
greategretNestingIsland	Tested with dataset 2
greategretNestingNonisland	Tested with dataset 3
greaterprairiechickenHarvested	No data available
greaterprairiechickenUnharvested	No data available
greatersandhillcraneLt200ha	No data available
greatersandhillcraneMtoe200ha	No data available
greaterwhitefrontedgooseWinteringWetland	Tested with datasets 1-3
greensunfishLac	Tested with datasets 1-3; CWQ is slightly off for dataset 1; recheck; no test of data that does not include salinity
greensunfishRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3; CWQ and HSI are slighlty higher than reported values for dataset three, re-check
greensunfishRivSal	No data available
gulfmenhadenEstuary	Tested with datasets 1-5
gulfmenhadenMarine	Tested with datasets 1-5
hairywoodpecker	No data available
hardclam	Tested with datasets 1-3
inlandsilversideNoZooplankton	tested with Point Judith data
inlandsilversideZooplankton	Tested with datasets 1-2
laketroutReproducingLakes	No data available
laketroutReproducingRes	No data available
laketroutStocked	No data available
largemouthbassLacN	Tested with datasets 1-3; Components and HSIs slightly different for all datasets, but maybe just rounding?; recheck
largemouthbassLacS	Tested with datasets 1-3; Components and HSIs slightly different for all datasets, but maybe just rounding?; recheck
largemouthbassRivGrad	Added model; Tested with datasets 1-3; Components and HSIs slightly different for all datasets, but maybe just rounding?; recheck
largemouthbassRivVel	Sample data does not include SIV19 and SIV21
larkbunting	No data available
laughinggull	Tested with dataset 1-3
leastternVegCovLt15OrMt25pct	No data available
leastternVegCovMtoe15OrLtoe25pct	No data available
lesserscaupBreeding	No data available
lesserscaupWintering	tested with datasets 1-3
lessersnowgooseWintering	Tested with datasets 1-3
lewiswoodpeckerSummerDeciduousDesertic	No data available
lewiswoodpeckerSummerEvergreen	No data available
lewiswoodpeckerWinterCropland	No data available
lewiswoodpeckerWinterNotEForC	No data available
lewiswoodpeckerYearRoundDeciduousDesertic	No data available
lewiswoodpeckerYearRoundEvergreen	No data available
littleneckclam	Tested with dataset 1
longnosedaceLac	Tested with datasets 1-3
longnosedaceRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3
longnosesuckerLac	Tested with datasets 1-3; CJA for dataset 2 should be 0.7 because SIV13=0.7 (mistake in doc); assumed SIV8 graph started at 0 based on sample data
longnosesuckerRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3
mallardCroplandCorn	No data available
mallardCroplandOtherCrops	No data available
mallardCroplandSoy	No data available
mallardForestedPaluWetlands	No data available
mallardNonforestedPaluLacRiv	No data available
marshwren	No data available
marten	No data available
minkPaluEmergHerb	No data available
minkPaluForestedOrShrubLess405ha	No data available
minkPaluForestedOrShrubMore405ha	No data available
minkRivLac	No data available
mooseLakeSupModelII	No data available
mottledduckAny	Tested with dataset 1
mottledduckBrood	Tested with dataset 3
mottledduckNesting	Tested with dataset 2 and SIV7 from dataset 1
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveA	No data available
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveB	No data available
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveC	No data available
muskellungeLargeLakeSpwnVegCurveD	No data available
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveA	No data available
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveB	No data available
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveC	No data available
muskellungeSmallLakeSpwnVegCurveD	No data available
muskratEstu	No data available
muskratHW	No data available
muskratRiv	No data available
northernbobwhiteCroplands	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh25.4cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh27.9cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh30.5cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh33.0cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh35.6cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteDbh38.1cm	No data available
northernbobwhiteShrub	No data available
northernpikeLacVegA	No data available
northernpikeLacVegB	No data available
northernpikeLacVegC	No data available
northernpikeLacVegD	No data available
northernpikeRivVegA	No data available
northernpikeRivVegB	No data available
northernpikeRivVegC	No data available
northernpikeRivVegD	No data available
northernpintail	No data available
northernpintailWinteringGulfCoastPaluLacEstuLtoe5ppt	Tested with dataset 1; NAs not allowed
northernpintailWinteringGulfPaluLacEstuMt5ppt	Tested with datasets 2 and 3
ospreyLac	No data available
ospreyRiv	No data available
paddlefishAdSummerandWinterHab	Tested with datasets 1-4
paddlefishSpwnHab	Tested with datasets 1-4
pileatedwoodpeckerE	No data available
pileatedwoodpeckerW	No data available
pinewarbler	No data available
pinksalmonLimit	Tested with dataset 1; add compensatory model if keeping brook trout compensatory?; SIV7 graph doesn’t seem to match info in text exactly
pinkshrimpEmergAndSeagrassVeg	Tested with dataset 3, although SIV2 values don’t make sense but give correct answer
pinkshrimpEmergVeg	Checked with Datasets 1,2, and 3
pinkshrimpSeagrassVeg	Checked with Datasets 1,2, and 3
plainssharptailedgrouse	No data available
pronghorn	No data available
RainbowtroutLac	No data available
rainbowtroutRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3; COT is slightly off for datasets 1 and 2, but probably rounding error
redbreastsunfishLacN	No data available
redbreastsunfishLacS	No data available
redbreastsunfishPalu	No data available
redbreastsunfishRiv	No data available
reddrumLarvJuvEstuLittleSubmVeg	Tested with datasets 1-3 from Table 3
reddrumLarvJuvEstuSubmVeg	Tested with datasets 1-3
redearsunfishLac	No data available
redearsunfishRiv	No data available
redheadWinteringWtrAvailable	Tested with datasets 1 and 2
redheadWinteringWtrNotAvailable	Tested with dataset 3
redkingcrabJuv1to4	Tested with datasets 1-3
redkingcrabJuv4PlusandAd	Tested with datasets 1-3
redkingcrabLarv	Tested with datasets 1-3
redkingcrabYoungofYrJuv	Tested with datasets 1-3
redspottednewtAquatic150m	No data available
redspottednewtAquaticEntire	No data available
redspottednewtTerrestrial	No data available
redwingedblackbirdA	No data available
redwingedblackbirdB	No data available
redwingedblackbirdC	No data available
roseatespoonbillIslandFuture	No data available
roseatespoonbillIslandPresent	Checked with datasets 1 and 2
roseatespoonbillMainlandFuture	No data available
roseatespoonbillMainlandPresent	Checked with dataset 3
ruffedgrouse	No data available
shortnosesturgeon	Checked with datasets 1-3
sliderturtle	No data available
sloughdarterLac	Checked with datasets 1-3
sloughdarterRiv	Checked with datasets 1-3; COT and HSI are incorrect for dataset 1, but this is likely a typo (0.02 vs. 0.2); Dataset 2 HSI is wrong, but this is a mistake because CWQ<=0.4, so should be 0.4; recheck
smallmouthbassLac	Tested with datasets 1-3; Dataset 2 produces incorrect values for CWQ and CR, recheck; CR may be rounding error
smallmouthbassRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3
smallmouthbuffaloLac	Tested with datasets 1-3; have someone else check format of CWQ equation; dataset 3 CWQ and HSI are wrong but typo because SIV8 is 0.3 so both should be 0.3, not 0.41
smallmouthbuffaloRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3; have someone else check format of CWQ equation; dataset 3 HSI is slightly off but may be a rounding error
snappingturtle	No data available
snowshoehareForageBiomass	No data available
snowshoehareForageVisual	No data available
southernkingfishEstu	Tested with datasets 2 and 3
southernkingfishMarine	No data available
southernredbackedvole	No data available
spotJuv	Tested with datasets 1, 2, and 3
spottedbassLac	No data available
spottedbassRiv	No data available
spottedowl	No data available
spottedseatrout	Tested on datasets 1-4
steelheadtroutRiv	No data available
stripedbassCoastal	Tested with datasets 1-4
stripedbassInlandLacAd	Tested with datasets 1-3
stripedbassInlandLacJuv	Tested with datasets 1-3
stripedbassInlandLacLarv	Tested with datasets 1-3
stripedbassInlandRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3
swamprabbitForestedWetland	No data available
swamprabbitHerbWetland	No data available
swamprabbitShrubForestedWetland	No data available
veeryNonWetland	No data available
veeryWetland	No data available
walleyeLacSecchiLtoe3.4m	No data available
walleyeLacSecchiMt3.4m	No data available
walleyeRivSecchiLtoe3.4m	No data available
walleyeRivSecchiMt3.4m	No data available
warmouthLac	No data available
warmouthRiv	No data available
westerngrebe	No data available
whitebassLacCurveASubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassLacCurveBSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassLacCurveCSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassLacTribCurveASubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassLacTribCurveBSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassLacTribCurveCSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitebassRivCurveASubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3; dataset 3 produces incorrect CF and COT values, but these appear to be typos in the documentation; recheck
whitebassRivCurveBSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3; dataset 3 produces incorrect CF and COT values, but these appear to be typos in the documentation; recheck
whitebassRivCurveCSubsIndex	Tested with datasets 1-3; dataset 3 produces incorrect CF and COT values, but these appear to be typos in the documentation; recheck
whitecrappieLac	Tested with datasets 1-3 w/out salinity; dataset 3 slightly off but likely rounding error
whitecrappieRiv	Tested with datasets 1-3 w/out salinity; dataset 3 slightly off but likely rounding error
whiteibisIsland	Tested with datasets 1 and 3
whiteibisWetland	Tested with dataset 2
whiteshrimpNGulfofMex	Tested with datasets 1-4
whitesuckerLacSpwnInletStrm	No data available
whitesuckerLacSpwnLake	Tested with datasets 1-3
whitesuckerLacSpwnLakeDrawMtoe2m	No data available
whitesuckerLacSpwnLakeDrawMtoe5m	No data available
whitesuckerRiv	Tested with dataset 1-3; could be tested with data from table 3 as well
whitetaileddeerModelII	Tested with three datasets
williamsonssapsucker	No data available
woodduckBreeding	No data available
woodduckWinter	No data available
woodduckYear	No data available
yellowheadedblackbird	No data available
yellowperchLac	Tested 2 datasets
yellowperchRiv	No data available
yellowwarbler	No data available

Table C-2. Testing records for functions in ecorest.

Function	Test	Example output	Number of tests	Expected output	Pass rate	Outcome
HSImin	Inputs for expected values	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the minimum of the inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0.25, NA, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the minimum of the non-NA inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid or out of range values	c(0.25, 0.25, 5.7, 0.75)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
HSIarimean	Inputs for expected values	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the arithmetic mean of the inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0.25, NA, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the arithmetic mean of the non-NA inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid or out of range values	c(0.25, 0.25, 5.7, 0.75)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
HSIgeomean	Inputs for expected values	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the geometric mean of the inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0.25, NA, 0.5, 0.75)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the geometric mean of the non-NA inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid or out of range values	c(0.25, 0.25, 5.7, 0.75)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
HSIwarimean	Inputs for expected values	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75), c(0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.1)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the weighted arithmetic mean of the inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0.25, NA, 0.5, 0.75), c(0.2, NA, 0.4, 0.1)	9999	Numeric output between 0 and 1 equal to the weighted arithmetic mean of the non-NA inputs	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid or out of range values	c(0.25, 5.7, 0.5, 0.75), c(0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.1)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect weighting	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75), c(0.2, 0.96, 0.4, 0.1)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of weights supplied	c(0.25, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75), c(0.2, 0.3, 0.2, 0.2, 0.1)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
HSIeqtn	Inputs for expected values when exclude is NULL	‘alewifeJuv’, c(0, 1, 1), HSImetadata, NULL	100 per model	Numeric output between 0 and 1	100%	Pass
	Inputs for expected values when exclude is not NULL	‘blacknosedace’, c(0, 1, 1, 0, 0.47, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.1, 0.2, 0.34, 0.4, NA, NA, 0.5, 0.16), HSImetadata, “CF”	100 per model	Numeric output between 0 and 2	.	.
	Inputs with incorrect HSImodelname	‘alewifeJuvaes’, c(0, 1, 1), HSImetadata, NULL	100 per model	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid SIV values	‘alewifeJuv’, c(0, 3.2, 1), HSImetadata, NULL	100 per model	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of SIV values	‘alewifeJuv’, c(0, 1, 1, 0.75), HSImetadata, NULL	100 per model	Error message	100%	Pass
SIcalc	Inputs with expected values from HSImodels	HSImodels barredowl, c(4, 40, 60)]	100 per model	Numeric outputs between 0 and 1 representing suitability index values for each input parameter	100%	Pass
	Inputs with expected values from manual models	Manual dataframe, c(4, 40, 60)	9999	Numeric outputs between 0 and 1 representing suitability index values for each input parameter	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values for parameters	Manual dataframe, c(4, NA, 60)	9999	Numeric outputs between 0 and 1 representing suitability index values for each non-NA input parameter	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid or out of range values	Manual dataframe, c(4, 40, 1000)	9999	Error message	.	.
	Inputs with incorrect number of values supplied	Manual dataframe, c(4, 40, 60, 50)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
Hucalc	Inputs for expected values	c(0, 0.1, 1), 100, HSImin	9999	Dataframe containing habitat quality, quantity, and index units	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0, NA, 1), 100, HSImin	9999	Dataframe containing habitat quality, quantity, and index units, excluding NA variables	100%	Pass
	Inputs with invalid values	c(0, 5.7, 1), 100, HSImin	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
HSIplotter	Inputs using HSImodels	HSImodels barredowl, “Barred_owl_curves.jpeg”)	349	Jpeg file with curves corresponding to HSImodels	100%	Pass
	Inputs for manual models	Manual data frame of breakpoints, “Model_curves.jpeg”)	349	Jpeg file with randomly generated curves	100%	Pass
annualizer	Inputs for expected values	c(0, 50), c(100, 100)	9999	Numeric output equal to the time-averaged value over the specified time horizon	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0, NA), c(100, NA)	9999	NA	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of time values	c(0, 50, 100), c(100, 100)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of benefit values	c(0, 100), c(100, 50, 100)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
CEfinder	Inputs for expected values	c(0, 10, 20), c(0, 100, 200)	9999	Vector of binary (0, 1) outputs reporting whether each plan is cost-effective	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0, NA, 20), c(0, NA, 200)	9999	Vector of binary (0, 1) outputs reporting whether each non-NA plan is cost-effective	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of benefit values	c(0, 10, 20, 30), c(0, 100, 200)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputer with incorrect number of cost values	c(0, 10, 20), c(0, 100, 200, 300)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
BBfinder	Inputs for expected values	c(0, 10, 5), c(0, 100, 200), c(1, 1, 0)	9999	List containing summary of all restoration actions and best buy plans	100%	Pass
	Inputs with NA values	c(0, NA, 5), c(0, NA, 200), c(1, NA, 1)	9999	List containing summary of all non-NA restoration actions and best buy plans	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of benefit values	c(0, 10, 4, 5), c(0, 100, 200), c(1, 1, 0)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of cost values	c(0, 10, 5), c(0, 100, 150, 200), c(1, 1, 0)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
	Inputs with incorrect number of cost-effective plan inputs	c(0, 10, 5), c(0, 100, 200), c(1, 1, 0, 1)	9999	Error message	100%	Pass
CEICAplotter	Inputs with expected values	c(“Alt_1”, “Alt_2”, “Alt_3”), c(20, 30, 40), c(100, 75, 150), c(1, 0, 1), c(1, 0, 1), “CEICA.jpeg”	300	Jpeg output	100%	Pass

Appendix D: Example of Sensitivity Analysis

A tutorial on how to conduct sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for HSI models can be found here: https://usace-wrises.github.io/USACE.EcoMod.Training/sensitivity-and-uncertainty-analysis-for-habitat-suitability-index-hsi-models.html

Appendix E: User’s Guide

Step-by-step (screenshot-style) guide for use. How is the model applied? Differences in scenarios? Experimental design for model runs? Range of uncertainty analyzed in model runs?

Insert step-by-step guide to model application with R only.

Appendix F: Example Applications

Insert overview of applications:

• Single-site existing condition assessment with multiple existing models (Savannah River)
  
• Modified HSI model (bluegill or modified mink)
  
• User-specified model (San Francisco)
  
• Impact assessment (Hernandez-Abrams/Jung/Fischer)
  
• Comparison of Single-Site Habitat Restoration Alternatives (Huron Island)
  
• Multi-site Restoration Prioritization (Hudson River)

F.1. Insert

Insert.

F.2. User-specified Model: Oyster Restoration

Insert.

#Import suitability curves naming rubric for all of the variables
oyster.SI <- read.csv("HSI.Swannack.oyster.csv", header=TRUE)

#Assemble random input sets for multiple hypothetical sites
noyster <- 10
input.oyster <- matrix(0,nrow=noyster,ncol=5)
input.oyster[,1] <- runif(noyster) #Percent of bottom with hard substrate (%)
input.oyster[,2] <- runif(noyster, min=0, max=30) #Mean salinity during spawning season (ppt)
input.oyster[,3] <- runif(noyster, min=0, max=15) #Minimum annual salinity (ppt)
input.oyster[,4] <- runif(noyster, min=0, max=30) #Mean annual salinity (ppt)
input.oyster[,5] <- runif(noyster, min=0, max=100) #Site area (acres)

#Loop over each site to compute variable suitability and total HSI
output.oyster.SI <- matrix(0,nrow=noyster,ncol=4)
output.oyster.HU <- data.frame(matrix(0,nrow=noyster,ncol=3))
for(i in 1:noyster){
  #Compute suitability relative to each variable
  output.oyster.SI[i,] <- SIcalc(oyster.SI, input.oyster[i,1:4])
  
  #Compute habitat units
  output.oyster.HU[i,] <- HUcalc(output.oyster.SI[i,], input.oyster[i,5], HSIgeomean)
}

#Create summary table
oyster.output <- cbind(round(input.oyster,2), round(output.oyster.SI,2), round(output.oyster.HU,2))
oyster.output <- data.frame(oyster.output)
colnames(oyster.output) <- c("Percent cultch (%)", "Mean salinity during spawning season (ppt)", "Minimum annual salinity (ppt)", "Mean annual salinity (ppt)", "Site area (acres)", "SI.cultch", "SI.MSSS", "SI.MAS", "SI.AS", "HSI", "Area (ac)", "Habitat Units")

#Return a summary table showing the rubric
knitr::kable(oyster.output, caption="Table F-2. Summary of oyster restoration example.")

Table F-2. Summary of oyster restoration example.

Percent cultch (%)	Mean salinity during spawning season (ppt)	Minimum annual salinity (ppt)	Mean annual salinity (ppt)	Site area (acres)	SI.cultch	SI.MSSS	SI.MAS	SI.AS	HSI	Area (ac)	Habitat Units
0.25	12.34	3.51	28.49	95.39	0.25	0.46	0.04	0.15	0.16	95.39	15.20
0.91	21.85	3.66	6.93	54.25	0.91	1.00	0.04	0.39	0.35	54.25	18.89
0.93	25.10	3.51	12.56	66.95	0.93	0.73	0.04	1.00	0.40	66.95	26.72
0.29	10.41	4.49	3.66	64.52	0.29	0.33	0.16	0.00	0.00	64.52	0.00
0.14	26.94	3.09	19.77	57.39	0.14	0.57	0.03	0.62	0.19	57.39	11.03
0.28	26.21	11.15	9.70	12.09	0.28	0.63	1.00	0.94	0.64	12.09	7.69
0.62	17.23	9.38	21.07	34.31	0.62	0.91	1.00	0.52	0.74	34.31	25.31
0.30	10.94	7.48	26.41	78.63	0.30	0.37	0.87	0.21	0.38	78.63	29.54
0.62	9.53	11.20	26.82	53.73	0.62	0.27	1.00	0.20	0.43	53.73	22.88
0.40	19.36	8.93	18.58	23.07	0.40	1.00	1.00	0.71	0.73	23.07	16.87

Appendix G: USACE Model Certification Review

Review comments were received on XXX. All comments follow the four-part comment structure of: (1) identify the problem, (2) describe the technical basis for the comment, (3) rate the significance or impact of the problem, and (4) recommend a mechanism for resolution.

G.1. Reviewer 1 (John Smith, USACE XXX District)

Comment 1.1: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.

Comment 1.2: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.

G.2. Reviewer 2 (Jane Smith, USACE YYY District)

Comment 2.1: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.

Comment 2.2: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.

G.3. Reviewer 3 (John Smith, USACE YYY District)

Comment 3.1: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.

Comment 3.2: Insert.

• Basis: Insert.
  
• Significance: Insert.
  
• Resolution: Insert.
  
• Author Response: Insert.